Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The challenges faced by teachers of English as a foreign language to young learners in
international contexts and their training and development needs and opportunities.
David John Brining
PhD
University of York
Education
February 2015.
2
Abstract
The growth in teaching English as a foreign language to young learners (TEYL) as a
distinctive area within the English Language Teaching industry during the last twenty
years raises some questions over who, in an industry that has traditionally focused on
adults, is going to teach these learners, aged, in this thesis, between five and sixteen years.
Emerging from existing literature and the occupational experience of this researcher is a
sense that teaching young learners (YLs) presents different challenges and requires
different skills from teaching adults. This research explored the experiences and needs of
those who trained to teach adults but also teach children.
Adopting a phenomenological, constructivist approach, a mixed-methods survey
of multiple-item self-report questionnaires and semi-structured, face-to-face interviews
was conducted to investigate the experiences and attitudes of two criteria-based samples
totalling 155 mixed-nationality EFL teachers giving out-of-school lessons in private
language centres in some forty different countries. The samples included both native and
non-native English speakers to reflect the possibility that some language centres might
employ such a mixed staff. Following an extensive pilot, the questionnaire was used to
identify general demographic trends in TEYL, to explore teachers’ experiences and
attitudes towards TEYL, their attitudes towards training and continuing occupational
development and their career pathway preferences. 139 questionnaires were returned, and
supplemented by 16 interviews.
The survey found that around 85 per cent of the respondents had not undertaken
any formal pre-service TEYL training and that nearly half had received no such training
in their first job. These teachers found aspects of TEYL such as planning and classroom
management particularly challenging. On the basis of these findings, the thesis argues
that current training and development programmes should be modified and, using
suggestions from the research sample, outlines some proposals for a new TEYL training
programme.
3
List of contents
Page
Abstract 2
List of contents 3
List of tables 7
List of figures 8
Acknowledgements 9
Author’s declaration 10
Chapter One: Introduction 11
1.1 Origins of the study 11
1.2 Previous research in Teaching English as a Foreign Language
to Young Learners 13
1.3 Research objectives, assumptions and questions 15
1.4 The scope of the study 16
1.4.1 The teachers 16
1.4.2 The context 17
1.5 Potential impact and contribution to knowledge 18
1.6 Content and structure of the thesis 19
Chapter Two: Background and context 21
2.1 English language, money, power and politics 22
2.1.1 Globalization and the demand for English Language Teaching 23
2.1.2 English and Englishes, native speakers and non-native speakers 25
2.1.3 The global politics of English Language Teaching 28
2.1.4 The commodification of the English language 31
2.2 The global demand for English Language Teaching to Young Learners 32
2.3 Teaching English to Young Learners in the private language sector 36
2.4 Teachers of English to Young Learners 38
2.5 Training for Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Young Learners 43
2.6 Summary 47
Chapter Three: Literature Review 49
3.1 From training to teaching 50
3.1.1 Reality shock 50
4
3.1.2 Culture shock 54
3.2 From teaching adults to teaching young learners 56
3.3 Principles of teacher development 63
3.4 Teacher development in practice 67
3.4.1 Institutionally organized teacher development 67
3.4.2 Self-initiated teacher development 70
3.4.3 Opportunistic teacher development 74
3.4.4 The place of theory in teacher development 75
3.5 Career pathways, cycles and future directions 78
3.6 Reflection, experience and the construction of knowledge 83
3.7 Summary 87
Chapter Four: Methodology 90
4.1 Overview and purpose 90
4.2 Research paradigms and methodological approaches 91
4.3 Research methods and data collection tools 94
4.3.1 Some qualitative data collection methods 95
4.3.2 Questionnaires 98
4.3.3 Interviews 100
4.3.4 Summary 103
4.4 Ethical issues 103
4.5 Sampling 105
4.5.1 Sampling methods 105
4.5.2 Location, contexts, sizes and characteristics of samples
used in this research 107
4.6 Data collection instruments and procedures 112
4.6.1 The questionnaire 112
4.6.2 The interviews 118
4.7 Data analysis methods and procedures 119
4.8 Validity, reliability and triangulation 122
4.9 Summary 123
Chapter Five: Data presentation and analysis 125
5.1 Section A: Working in English Language Teaching 126
5.2 Section B: Working with Young Learners 133
5
5.3 Section C: Teacher training and development 148
5.4 Authentication of findings and summary 159
Chapter Six: Discussion of data and findings 162
6.1 The challenges of teaching English as a foreign language
to Young Learners 162
6.1.1 The context of teaching English as a foreign language
to Young Learners 163
6.1.2 The challenges of teaching English as a foreign language
to Young Learners 164
6.1.3 The need for theory in English Language Teaching
to Young Learners 168
6.1.4 Summary 169
6.2 Training and occupational development opportunities in teaching
English as a foreign language to Young Learners 170
6.2.1 The theorizing practitioner 171
6.2.2 Training opportunities for Young Learner English teachers 173
6.2.3 Opportunities for occupational teacher development 176
6.2.4 Summary 179
6.3 Meeting challenges and pursuing opportunities in teaching
English as a foreign language to Young Learners 179
6.3.1 Reflections on attitude and experience in new cultures 180
6.3.2 Career cycles and possible pathways 182
6.3.3 The position of non-native English speaker teachers 185
6.3.4 Summary 188
6.4 A framework for the training and occupational development of
teachers of English as a foreign language to Young Learners 188
6.5 Summary 196
Chapter Seven: Conclusions, implications and future research 198
7.1 Research review 198
7.1.1 Assumptions, aims and questions 198
7.1.2 Methodology and methods 199
7.2 Research findings 200
6
7.2.1 The challenges of teaching English as a foreign language to
Young Learners in a private language centre context 201
7.2.2 Training and occupational development opportunities in
teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners 201
7.2.3 Meeting the challenges of teaching English as a foreign language
to Young Learners 202
7.3 Significance of the research 203
7.3.1 Contribution to the literature 203
7.3.2 Implications for practice 203
7.4 Limitations, authenticity and credibility of the research 204
7.5 Suggestions for further research 207
7.6 Conclusion 208
Appendix 1: Sample copy of informed consent forms 211
Appendix 2: Sample copy of the pilot questionnaire 213
Appendix 3: Sample copy of electronic questionnaire 219
Appendix 4: Sample copy of interview schedule 230
Definitions of key terms 231
Abbreviations 232
List of references 233
7
List of tables
1. Us and Them: some differences between native and non-native speakers . 26
2. Pennington’s eight-role career path of occupationally meaningful events. 81
3. Geographical distribution of pilot sample. 108
4. Characteristics of pilot sample. 108
5. Geographical distribution of questionnaire sample. 109
6. Characteristics of questionnaire sample. 109
7. Qualifications of questionnaire sample. 110
8. Characteristics of interview sample. 111
9. Demographic characteristics of total research sample. 111
10. Suggestions for an initial, pre-service TEYL preparation module 148
11. Training framework, Module One: Child Development and
Language Learning 193
12. Training framework, Module Two: Motivation and Managing Behaviour. 194
13. Training framework, Module Three: Lesson Planning and Organization. 195
14. Training framework, Module Four: Building Relationships and
Developing Contexts. 195
15. Training framework, Module Five: Managing Continuing Occupational
Development. 196
8
List of figures
Fig. 1: What respondents did before they entered ELT (item 2). 126
Fig. 2: Why respondents became English Language Teachers (item 3). 127
Fig. 3: Teachers who did a pre-service training course before starting to teach
(item 4). 128
Fig. 4: YL age-groups taught by respondents (item 8). 129
Fig. 5: The average class-size in respondents' centres (item 9). 130
Fig. 6: Course materials used by teachers (item 10). 131
Fig. 7: Who decides your syllabus and assessment system? (Item 11). 131
Fig. 8: Alignment of YL syllabus to the host country's curriculum (item 12.) 132
Fig. 9: Pre-service TEYL training courses taken before first TEYL job (item 14). 133
Fig. 10: Type of support provided to teachers in first post (item 15). 134
Fig. 11: How prepared teachers felt before they started TEYL (item 16). 136
Fig. 12: How enjoyable respondents found TEYL at the start (item 17). 137
Fig. 13: Teachers' early career feelings about TEYL (item 18). 138
Fig. 14: How teachers' feelings towards TEYL have changed (item 19). 139
Fig. 15: Comparison of early career attitudes and current career attitudes to
TEYL (items 18 and 19). 139
Fig. 16: Possible factors for changes in attitude to TEYL (item 20). 140
Fig. 17: Eight challenges of TEYL (item 21). 141
Fig. 18: Respondents' views on whether a TEYL module should be included
on the CELTA course (item 22). 146
Fig. 19: Most rewarding or stimulating developmental experiences (item 24). 149
Fig. 20: Possible activities and opportunities for teacher development (item 25). 150
Fig. 21: Most useful teacher development activities (item 26). 151
Fig. 22: What respondents value most in an INSET session (item 27). 152
Fig. 23: Members of the sample with job plans (item 28). 153
Fig. 24: Members of the sample with probationary periods (item 29). 154
Fig. 25: Additional roles and responsibilities (item 30). 155
Fig. 26: Type of support received in new roles (item 31). 156
Fig. 27: Where respondents might go next in their careers (item 32). 157
Fig. 28: 'Teaching YLs is...' (item 37) 158
9
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Professor Chris Kyriacou, the PhD programme leader in the
Department of Education at the University of York, my supervisors, Dr Jan Hardman and
Dr Annie Hughes, and the examiners, Professor Fiona Copland and Dr Andy Cirocki, for
their patience, their support, their guidance and their invaluable input in shaping this
thesis. I would also like to thank Gail Ellis MBE, Martin Goosey and John Knagg OBE
from the British Council and Kylie Malinowski from International House who distributed
my questionnaires throughout their organizations. In addition, Dr Shelagh Rixon
(University of Warwick) and Dr Helen Emery (University of Essex) indicated possible
lines of enquiry and shared their work with me in the early stages of the research. Finally,
2016 sees the 30th birthday of IATEFL’s Young Learner Special Interest Group
(YLTSIG). This group has also proved helpful and supportive, and provided a forum for
the discussion of many of the issues explored in this work.
The teachers, parents and Young Learners with whom I have worked over many
years are too numerous to mention individually, but my time at the British Council Sri
Lanka (2002-5) seems to have been a critical formative period in my own YL journey, so
I would like to thank Richard Lunt, then Centre Manager, Fiona Harrison-Rees, my
DELTA tutor and YL Senior Teacher, and her successor in that post, Jill Turner, for
providing me with opportunities and encouragement to engage with TEYL and develop
it as an area of occupational expertise.
Finally, I wish to thank my parents, Colin and Christine Brining, for putting me
up and putting up with me throughout this journey, and Hamish, our dog, who learned
more about this subject than anyone on many reflective riverbank walks. Without them,
there would be no thesis at all.
10
Author’s declaration
I declare that this thesis, its contents and text is all my own work and that I have had no
assistance in its preparation other than the suggestions and recommendations provided by
my supervisors and examiners in accordance with the requirement of their roles. I further
declare that all the data collected and presented herein is, to the best of my knowledge,
true and accurate and has been gathered and processed by me, and only me, as described
within the thesis. This work has not been presented for examination or published in any
format or forum before and I declare that I am its sole author.
11
Chapter One
Introduction
This chapter introduces the research study. It describes how it is grounded in my
experience as a teacher of English as a foreign language and complements previous and
recent research into teaching English as a foreign language to young learners (TEYL). It
is in five sections. The first (1.1) summarizes my own experience and indicates how this
research is underpinned and informed by it. The second section (1.2) describes some
previous research into Young Learner English Language Teaching, particularly in the
private sector. The third section (1.3) outlines the objectives of this research, the
assumptions underlying it and the three research questions that the thesis investigates.
The fourth section (1.4) details the scope of the study, including the target population and
context, whilst the fifth section (1.5) considers potential impact and contribution to
knowledge. The sixth and final section (1.6) describes the structure of the thesis and the
contents of each of the six chapters.
1.1 Origins of the study
The expansion of English Language Teaching to Young Learners during the last two
decades has fuelled a need for increasing numbers of English as a Foreign Language
(EFL) teachers to teach increasing numbers of children (or ‘young learners’) in addition
to adults as countries, schools and private language centres develop their Young Learner
provision and employers seemingly expect English Language teachers to be able to teach
anyone of any age. However, the pre-service training courses available at the time of
writing appear to retain their traditional focus on adults and thus may not fully reflect
these expectations. Consequently some English Language teachers appear to be teaching
children without the training they might need because they are obliged to do so under the
terms of their contracts.
In 1997, in order to become an English Language teacher, I (the researcher) did
the Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA), a four-week full-time
intensive course with a certificate awarded by University of Cambridge Local
Examinations Syndicate (UCLES) and the most widespread pre-service training course
in the industry. The CELTA contained little theory. It concentrated on practical classroom
teaching and was concerned exclusively with teaching English to adults. The focus and
content of this course is described and evaluated more fully in the next chapter (see 2.5
below). However, my first post-qualification teaching position was not with adults at all,
12
but on a summer school in a city in northern England with teenagers aged 14 to 17. My
first international post, in a private language centre in Russia that was owned by a
company based in the United Kingdom, involved classes containing both adults and
young teenagers (13 and 14 years old), and, in one class of adults, an 11 year old. Nothing
in either my training or my previous teaching experience indicated how to approach such
mixed-age classes. In addition, the materials, curriculum and assessment system were
designed for the adults so the younger learners were essentially taught as though they
were adults. However, when I was given a class consisting exclusively of Young
Learners, I was unable to teach them like I did adults. Their attention span was shorter,
their behaviour needed more overt management, the tasks had to be different and the
teaching resources, including the course-books, were unfamiliar to me, aimed as they
were at children. The group ranged in age from 5 to 11 years old and the levels of ability
in English from beginner to intermediate. With no training in either teaching or managing
groups of non-English-speaking children, I approached the Director of Studies for advice.
He asked if I played the guitar or made puppets. I said I could not. He told me not to
worry, that I would soon pick it up, and sent me to class. I had no idea what to do, how
to speak to these students, how to organize their learning, what kind of activities to select
or how long they should last, or how to use the course-book in three 90 minute classes
per week. I had neither understanding nor knowledge of 5 to 11 year olds, of their worlds,
their developmental stages, their interests, and no desire to gain any. I was a teacher of
English as a foreign language to adults. That was what I had trained for, that was what I
wanted to do and that was why I had left the United Kingdom. Singing songs and drawing
pictures was not. The experience of feeling unprepared as a teacher through lacking
practical strategies to organize learning was both traumatic and stressful. At Christmas
the class was reallocated and I decided I would never teach Young Learners again.
In 2002, I moved to a language centre in Sri Lanka which had a large Young
Learner cohort ranging from 3 to 16 years old and so many classes that every teacher was
contracted to teach a mixed timetable of adults and Young Learners. This centre,
however, provided regular in-service training, a structured occupational development
programme, including the opportunity to do the Young Learner extension to CELTA,
which I did in Thailand in 2004, and opportunities to become involved in curriculum
development, materials writing, training, event management and mentoring. The content
and focus of the YL extension is considered in the next chapter and it developed my
confidence as a Young Learner teacher by providing a theoretical framework and
foundation for my work. Two years later I became Young Learner manager for a large
13
globally significant UK-based language centre in Egypt. Now I found myself in the
position of the director I had met in 1999, cajoling, supporting, encouraging and
occasionally coercing teachers of adults into teaching Young Learners because it was part
of the contract. Some struggled, partly because their training and/or prior experience had
been totally adult-oriented and partly because they did not really want to teach Young
Learners anyway. They did not know what resources might be used or how to use them
and they lacked strategies for managing behaviour and motivation. Some became
resentful as well as reluctant when allocated classes of Young Learners.
When I did an MA in Teaching English to Young Learners (2007-9), it became
clear that the challenges and demands presented by teaching Young Learners are different
from those presented by adults and that meeting those challenges can be difficult without
some knowledge of how Young Learners grow and develop and of the different
developmental stages they pass through. My own development, from uninformed and
reluctant novice in 1997 to confident consultant contributing to the creation of a new
English Language Teaching to Young Learners policy for a whole country in 2010 came
about partly through actual experience of Young Learner teaching, partly through the
ideas and input of colleagues in staff rooms and teacher development workshops and
partly from formal courses such as the Young Learner extension and the MA. These
revealed how Young Learners develop, thereby enabling me to select age- and stage-
appropriate materials, activities and tasks and base those selections on some
understanding of learning theory. In addition, I was also able to support my colleagues
with a set of transferrable principles grounded in academic theory rather than a simple
menu of practical tips. Perhaps some teachers get this training in-post, as part of their
occupational development. However, for some, training and occupational development
may depend on the centre’s priorities and resources and the training manager’s interests.
Training and development may therefore lie in the luck of the posting. This research
investigated those training and development priorities in addition to teachers’ expressed
needs and requirements.
1.2 Previous research in Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Young Learners
Whilst there may be some deficiencies in industry practice, there seems to be limited
published research into teaching English as a foreign language to young learners from a
teacher’s perspective. Although such research has “developed rapidly in recent years,
mirroring the increase in the numbers of young children learning English globally…
research-based publications into effective practices for teaching Young Learners continue
14
to be quite rare” (Copland & Garton, 2014, pp. 223 & 226). Whilst there seems to be
some research into classroom experiences, the role and effectiveness of initial training
programmes, occupational and career development possibilities or motivation and
attitude and how teachers feel about working with children, this tends to focus on the
state-maintained sector and there appears to be little research into the position of Young
Learner English teaching in the unregulated, commercially orientated private sector of
the industry. Consequently, the aim of this research is to investigate these areas, set in the
private language centre context, and illuminate aspects of practice as well as motivation
and aspiration.
Alain de Botton remarked that “you become a TEFL teacher when your life has
gone wrong.” This sentiment is cited in the Daily Telegraph by one former teacher, now
a journalist, Sebastian Cresswell-Turner, who claims that “the job is tedious, the salary
appalling and the prospects nil… no-one with a scrap of ambition would choose to teach
English as a foreign language” (2004, p. 1). But people do. They not only choose the job,
they often develop those jobs into careers. This aspect of Teaching English as a Foreign
Language (TEFL) appears to be under-researched but teacher motivation, the question of
why some people leave their homes to teach English in foreign countries, why some stay
in this industry for years and how far it is true that TEFL is something you do when ‘life
has gone wrong’ seems fundamental to reaching an understanding of the TEFL teaching
body, of the nature of TEFL itself and consequently to the training, development and
management of those teachers. This research attempts to explore some of those issues and
provide some knowledge about those who choose to teach English as a Foreign Language
for a job and why they do so.
A further under-researched area of TEFL appears to be Teaching English as a
Foreign Language to Young Learners (TEYL) in the private sector. Most of the published
research, including the global surveys undertaken in the last few years by Emery (2012),
Enever (2011), Garton, Copland and Burns (2011) and Rixon (2000, 2013) focused
mainly on state-maintained school-based education, particularly at the primary school
level. The private sector of English Language Teaching, however, may play an important
role in the shaping of the public agenda as well as providing accessible entry-points for
many new English Language teachers, particularly native speakers working abroad.
Private language centres can also present different challenges from those experienced in
state schools. For example, in some private centres, Young Learners might be taught in
the same classes as adults. Such a situation will have implications for materials selection,
lesson planning and classroom management. Resources intended for and aimed
15
specifically at Young Learners may be scarce, limited or non-existent. Placement tests or
assessment instruments used for Young Learners might be adapted from ones originally
designed for adults. Young Learner provision could be less clearly defined and organized
than that for adults. Young Learner teachers may not have appropriate training or skills.
The value and quality of English Language Teaching experienced by the Young Learners
may be variable or even poor as a result.
Despite this, little research on private sector practices in teaching English to
Young Learners or the ways in which teachers trained to teach adults manage the
transition to the Young Learner classroom seems to have been published. Similarly, there
appears to be little research into how the private sector organizes, prioritizes and manages
teacher development programmes, especially in TEYL. This study attempts to explore
what is happening in the private sector in terms of both classroom practice and teacher
development, and develop existing knowledge of this area by providing new data from
current teachers.
1.3 Research objectives, assumptions and questions
This research had two main objectives:
a) to identify particular challenges for teachers of English as a foreign language to young
learners and explore how far pre- and in-service training and development programmes
support teachers in meeting those challenges;
b) to develop the existing literature on Teaching English to Young Learners by generating
and interpreting new knowledge of private sector practices, in particular on training and
occupational development, and teachers’ attitudes towards TEYL, including motivation
and individual aspirations.
Five assumptions underlie these objectives:
The English Language Teaching industry has seen and continues to see a strong
global expansion in demand for English tuition for Young Learners (aged 5 to 16)
and Very Young Learners under the age of 5 (VYLs);
This expansion has significant implications for the English Language Teaching
industry. These include teacher training, recruitment and employment;
Teaching children poses different challenges from teaching adults and may,
therefore, require different skills and knowledge. Teaching Very Young Learners
poses different challenges from teaching teenagers and may also require a
different skill-set;
16
Formal pre-service training does not seem to have evolved to meet the needs of a
reoriented industry and continues to focus almost exclusively on preparing people
to teach adult learners;
Many newly qualified teachers therefore lack the knowledge they need to meet
the challenges presented by Young Learner classes. The level and quality of post-
training support and development appears variable with some teachers getting
none at all.
In order to explore these assumptions and develop research into classroom practice,
motivation and attitude, it seemed useful to discover whether teachers do feel that
Teaching English to Young Learners is different from Teaching English to Adults, and,
if so, whether they feel adequately prepared for it, whether they are, in fact, entering
Young Learner classrooms without any specific training for teaching or working with
children, and, if so, what kind of support they receive. It seemed useful to discover what
untrained teachers actually do in their Young Learner classrooms, whether they are able
to adapt their basic Cambridge English Language Teaching certificate (CELTA) or their
Trinity Cert training, what opportunities arise, how they develop as teachers and how they
feel about their experiences. It might be the case that CELTA needs to evolve to prepare
teachers for Teaching English to Young Learners as well as Teaching English to Adults.
On the other hand, it is possible that teachers do not need specific Young Learner training
after all and are able to adapt their basic pre-service adult-oriented training to meet the
challenges of a different context. Consequently, three research questions were
formulated:
1. What challenges face teachers of English to Young Learners as a foreign
language in private language centres?
2. What opportunities for training and occupational development are available to
those teachers?
3. How do these opportunities help teachers meet the challenges of teaching
English as a foreign language to Young Learners?
Answers to these questions, it was hoped, might add to existing knowledge by providing
new insights into private sector practice.
1.4 The scope of the study
1.4.1 The teachers
Most of the teachers involved in and addressed by this study live and work outside their
home-country. They are ‘globally mobile’, meaning that, to a greater or lesser extent, they
17
can choose where they work in a job centre that covers the world. Most are native speakers
of English who trained to teach adults through the Cambridge Certificate (CELTA) or its
Trinity College equivalent and teach English as a foreign language in a foreign country
in private language centres which provide English classes to paying customers in the
evenings and at weekends outside the mainstream education system of the host-country.
Such teachers interest me partly because these are the teachers I have worked with and
the context with which I am most familiar. In addition, I am interested in issues such as
culture shock and how people adapt to unfamiliar contexts, again from personal
experience. Unfamiliar contexts here may include the world and culture of Teaching
English as a foreign language to Young Learners itself.
There seems little published research into the motivation and attitudes of such
migrant teachers, although they comprise a significant, possibly representative element
of the English Language Teaching industry. Furthermore there appears to be little
research into the impact of culture shock on motivation, a potentially critical area of
teachers’ lives. This survey, however, also included globally mobile non-native speakers
and some ‘locally static’ teachers, both native speakers and non-native speakers, where
their experiences seemed to further illuminate the issues, challenges and needs, and
because all these teacher-types might be found working together in many private language
centres around the world.
1.4.2 The context
Private language centres provide ‘after-hours’ or extra-curricular English lessons to
paying customers, typically for a few hours every week in the evening or at weekends.
These centres are independent of the governments and education ministries of the host
countries and provide only language tuition. They do not prepare children for the host
country’s national school examinations, opting instead for international language
examinations such as Cambridge’s First Certificate in English (FCE) or the International
English Language Testing System (IELTS). They control their own teacher recruitment
and selection practices and can set their own entry requirements. They might be run as
commercial businesses or as charitable enterprises. The centre’s financial viability, often
its very existence, may depend largely on student enrolment with tuition fees forming a
significant element of the centre’s income. They can be part of a global network of similar
centres, franchises or small-scale private businesses run by local owners on a ‘for-profit’
basis. Students entering such schools might take a placement test to establish the level of
their English language proficiency and join a class of students with a similar level. Age
18
might, or might not, be a factor in this placement process. Examples of private language
centres based in the United Kingdom but with a global presence include the British
Council, International House, English First, Bell and Language Link.
Whilst previous research into the practices of teaching English as a Foreign
Language to Young Learners across the world tends to have focused on state-maintained
primary schools delivering a curriculum within an externally and/or governmentally
imposed framework, it has not explored practices in this largely unregulated private sector
in depth or detail, and yet it is this private sector that, arguably, may help to drive change
in the public sector, particularly in terms of curriculum, teaching methods and assessment
systems (see Chapter Two below). As a result of this possible influence, research into
private language centre practices seems important and this study aims to illuminate some
aspects of teaching English to Young Learners in this sector which may have been
previously under-researched.
1.5 Potential impact and contribution to knowledge
This research aims to provide an insight into the experiences, attitudes and aspirations of
global private-sector Young Learner English Language teachers between 2011 and 2015.
Their reflections, perceptions and observations on both teaching English to Young
Learners and their own development as teachers may interest:
those working in teacher training, development and education;
Young Learner English Language teachers themselves, particularly those who are
relatively inexperienced;
managers of teachers and language centres, particularly those who work in
recruitment and teacher supervision/management;
researchers into teacher motivation, development and training.
The studies by Emery (2012), Enever (2011), Garton, Copland and Burns (2011)
and Rixon (2000, 2013) referred to earlier and again in more detail in the next chapter
tended to focus on government-maintained primary schools and on policy development
and implementation at a national governmental level. The private English Language
Teaching sector within many of these countries may be both thriving and influential yet
there seem to be few studies focusing specifically on Young Learner teaching practices
in this sector, perhaps because the number and diversity of such schools across the globe
can make a research population difficult to identify or perhaps because some private
language centres could be dismissed as unaccountable, unregulated, unaccredited
commercial enterprises. Nevertheless, these language centres may be where many
19
expatriate English Language Teachers might work. The number of English Language
teachers in the private sector across the world is impossible to establish unequivocally
and this may be why it appears to have been neglected in some research. This study,
therefore, attempts to explore not only the world of private Young Learner English
Language Teaching but also the people who work in that world and, as a result,
complement previous and continuing research with a new dimension. In addition, this
study highlights areas in which teachers themselves feel they need more training. These
are discussed at length and form the basis of a training framework that might supplement
or replace current courses. Should this framework be developed within the industry, the
potential for impact on teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners and the
professional status of its practitioners could be real and lasting.
1.6 Content and structure of the thesis
In addition to this introductory chapter, the thesis contains six others. Chapter Two
contextualizes the research by describing and discussing the apparent growth in teaching
English as a foreign language to young learners across the world, mainly at primary level,
that has occurred since the late 1990s. It considers some reasons for this growth and some
of its implications for the English Language Teaching industry by referring to five recent
reports on the subject. It discusses some aspects of the private language centre sector and
explores reasons why some parents choose this to supplement the English Language
classes provided to their children in school, if indeed any are. It also reflects upon the
motivation and priorities of people who become teachers of English as a foreign or second
language and evaluates the Cambridge Certificate in English Language Teaching to
Adults (CELTA) and its Young Learner extension course in addition to some other
employer-provided programmes aimed at training teachers in English Language Teaching
to Young Learners.
Chapter Three discusses some challenges of teaching English in foreign language
contexts, particularly those involved in teaching Young Learners, and considers some
principles and practices of teacher training and development through a reflection on some
of the currently available literature. It discusses the transition from training to teaching
and the resultant ‘reality shock’ alongside culture shock more generally. In addition, it
explores some principles, practices and possible pathways of teacher development,
considering both advantages and restrictions of learning from experience and reflection
and describes a range of teacher development activities proposed by other writers. It
examines some benefits and limitations of both formal, institutionally organized teacher
20
development and informal, self-directed teacher development and considers ways in
which careers in teaching English to Young Learners in private language centres in
international contexts might evolve.
Chapter Four describes the methodology adopted for this study. It outlines the
research design and explains why some methods were selected whilst others were not.
The chapter explains how the research samples were identified and developed and how
the data collection instruments were constructed, piloted, modified and conducted. It
explores the ethical considerations underlying the survey and describes the pilot study
before explaining the questionnaire distribution process and the interview procedure.
Finally it describes how the data was coded, categorized and analyzed.
Chapter Five presents, analyzes, interprets and evaluates data from the
questionnaire and the interviews in a variety of formats including tables and bar-charts
relevant to and organized around the research questions.
Chapter Six explores and discusses the findings in more depth. It is organized
around providing answers to the research questions and examining the key assumptions
that underpin the study. In linking statistical data to the written evidence of research
participants and connecting findings to the literature reviewed in Chapter Three, it places
those findings in the developing Young Learner English Language Teaching research
continuum. In addition, it uses the evidence of this research and the wider literature in
which it is situated to suggest possible changes to the content and focus of pre-service
English Language Teaching training courses and different shapes to post-training teacher
development opportunities for teachers of English as a foreign language to young
learners, presenting a draft outline for a framework for training potential Young Learner
English teachers.
Chapter Seven, the conclusion, reviews the research, summarizes the thesis and
considers some limitations of the research, including the strengths and weaknesses of the
sample itself. Finally, it reiterates the study’s key findings and recommendations.
The four appendices contain the documents used for this study including examples
of the informed consent form, pilot and final questionnaires and the interview schedule
21
Chapter Two
Background and context
This chapter describes the background to the research in order to situate it in a wider
context and to explain the origins of the assumptions and research questions referred to
in the previous chapter. It is in seven sections. The first (2.1) examines some of the issues
in contemporary English Language Teaching including the development of the profession
into a commercially driven industry through the influences of globalization and a neo-
liberal political-economic agenda. The second (2.2) describes the growth in demand for
English Language Teaching for Young Learners since the late 1990s within that new
business context. It explores some of the reasons behind that growth and considers some
of the implications for the wider English Language Teaching industry that result from it.
Five reports, four commissioned by the British Council and one (Enever’s) by the Council
of Europe, form the foundation of this background. These were by Emery in 2012, Enever
in 2011, Garton, Copland and Burns, also in 2011, and two by Rixon, the first in 2000
and the second in 2013. Drawing on publications by United Kingdom-based global
English Language Teaching providers including the British Council and International
House, the third section (2.3) describes the private sector of English Language Teaching
and Teaching English to Young Learners and considers why parents might choose to send
their children to private language centres as well as the potential impact these institutions
could have on local teaching practice and methodology. The fourth section (2.4) considers
the English Language teachers themselves, who they might be, where they might come
from and what might motivate them to pursue a career in Teaching English as a Foreign
Language. The fifth section of this chapter (2.5) describes the formal training courses
available to potential teachers of English as a foreign language and English to Young
Learners. It examines the syllabus content, focus and requirements of Cambridge’s
Certificate of English Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA), evaluating it for strengths
and limitations as a pre-service preparatory course, and examines and evaluates Young
Learner-specific training programmes including Cambridge’s YL extension to the
CELTA. A number of employer-delivered Young Learner training programmes are also
described and gaps in the current general training provision identified. The chapter’s key
points are summarized in 2.6.
22
2.1 English Language Teaching, money, power and politics
English Language Teaching is big business. In 2006, the United Kingdom “derive[d]
nearly £1.3 billion… from the ELT sector alone and around £10 billion… from education-
related exports” (Hall, 2011, p. 221). By 2013, the value of the English Language
Teaching sector had doubled to £2.5 billion, with London earning an estimated £770
million, Bournemouth £213 million and Brighton £206 million (English UK, 2013). In
addition, the United Kingdom government, naming education as the country’s fifth
largest export sector, estimates the value of the English Language Teaching industry
internationally at around US$50 billion, with a global ‘market’ of some 1.5 billion
learners (Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, 2013, p. 33). The Department
for Business, Innovation and Skills forecasts this market to grow at 25% between 2012
and 2017, from US$ 63 billion to US$ 193 billion, making it “the fastest growing part of
the education sector outside of the emerging ed. tech sectors” (ibid., p. 33). The report
cites, as examples, the British Council, which, in 2011-12, taught 300,000 students in 50
countries and examined 1 million students for United Kingdom-based qualifications, and
Pearson, the publishing company, which “taught more than 190,000 English Language
students in more than 70 different countries… earning US$800 million in 2012” (ibid., p.
33). The report notes, however, that whilst “the provision of ELT abroad is likely to have
little direct benefit to the UK economy as the majority of fee income will remain in the
country of provision, there are likely to be entry fees for students sitting [UK] exams
and… there may also be some direct benefits to the UK via the purchase of textbooks”
(ibid., p. 34). The English Language Teaching sector of the educational publishing
industry may be worth around £200 million (ibid., p. 53), with Block, Gray and Holborow
(2012) reporting that “17 per cent of all books exported from the UK are ELT textbooks
and that sales increased by 26 per cent from £164 million in 2005 to £207 million in 2009”
(p. 11).
Education appears to have become a product for export and the English language
a commodity to be bought, sold and traded, with its teachers becoming suppliers of that
commodity (Gray, 2010b) and other elements of the industry such as course-book
publication or examination provision acting as product-support services. It is an industry
Holliday (2005) describes as “dynamic and aggressive, and complemented by an equally
commercially aggressive publishing industry which floods the world with influential
textbooks” (p. 28). But it is not just a business. It is, as Phillipson writes, “an international
activity with political, economic, military and cultural implications” (1992, p. 8), for, in
addition to financial and economic benefits, the British, Australian and North American
23
(BANA) governments, through exporting their language and their teaching methods
might also be able to transmit their political beliefs and social values in a form of cultural
colonialism. This may be particularly evident when the English tuition is provided by
organizations such as the British Council which exist primarily to promote British
business and culture internationally (Pennycook, 1996; Phillipson, 1992).
This section considers aspects of the globalization of English, and the role of
English in the globalization process itself, the types of English taught to the 1.5 billion
learners and some issues surrounding the roles of native and non-native English speaker
teachers, defined as people who have unconsciously acquired English as their first
language rather than people who have consciously learned it in addition to their first
language. Finally it explores the politics of teaching English as a foreign language and
teaching English to Young Learners in a neoliberal world, and the branding of language
as a commodity for sale.
2.1.1 Globalization and the demand for English Language Teaching
According to Holborow (1999), the rise of English to become the pre-eminent global
language can be explained by the “broader perspective of the economic weight of the
USA and the workings of international capitalism” (p. 79) though “reactions to [its
dominance] differ widely” (p. 53). McKay (1992) states this explicitly by suggesting that
“teaching English is… infused with social and political significance” (p. 3) because of
the power it has to open access to business, technology, travel, science, academic study,
research and economic success. “English,” writes Modiano (2001), “Is now a prerequisite
for participation in a vast number of activities. The global village is being constructed in
the English language, as are the information highways [and] access to findings in science
and technology is made through English” (p. 341). Transnational companies use English
as a lingua franca, international non-governmental organizations such as the United
Nations, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Health
Organization use it as their working language (McKay, 1992; Modiano, 2001; Tan &
Rudby, 2008), and in part because of the rise of the Internet, it is becoming the language
of an ‘Anglophone’ popular culture (Gray, 2010a) through the global distribution of
television shows like Friends and film franchises such as Harry Potter, which may have
done more than anything else to popularize English, and English education, among Young
Learners across the world. As Modiano (2001) points out “a global culture is emerging
wherein cultural artefacts are created in the English language by non-native speakers.
24
Swedish musicians, for example [ABBA], have for some time produced popular songs in
the English language which have been successful internationally” (p. 341).
“English,” write Tan and Rudby, “is seen as an instrument of modernization,
economic progress and social, educational and occupational success” facilitating “social
mobility and economic power” for the individual (2008, p. 5), adding value in a “highly
competitive and flexible job market” (Gray, 2010a, p. 16). Whilst English and other
majority languages are linked with ‘modernization’ and ‘progress’, ‘minor’ languages are
reduced to the status of ‘cultural heritage’ or marginalized altogether. Furthermore,
regional variations of English such as Singlish (Singaporean English) are being
‘nationally problematized’ (Hoon, 2008). Moreover, Rudby (2008) notes that, in India,
“the domination of the symbolic market by English and the perpetuation of the uneven
distribution of English linguistic capital has continued to construct ‘social failures’ out of
the vast majority of the children in India” (p. 135). He suggests that English has been
successfully marketed as the language of progress and development whilst establishing
(or re-establishing) itself as the language of knowledge, with most academic publishing
in India being in English. It is also, in India, the language of social mobility, of entry to
higher education and of recruitment into the professions, for example medicine, law or
the civil service and everything is controlled by the all-pervasive, all-powerful “discourse
of globalization” (Rudby, 2008, p. 137).
Block and Cameron (2002) define globalization as a “fundamentally Western
ideology and culture, best exemplified by the modern United States becoming the norm
around the world” (pp. 3-4) and demonstrated by the emergence of the shopping mall, the
clothes that people wear, the presence of Hollywood movies and the influence of Disney’s
films and merchandise. The Disney Corporation even has its own chain of language
schools in China (see 2.4 below). One example familiar to this researcher is City Stars
Mall in Nasr City, Cairo, Egypt. Frequented by young, affluent, middle class Egyptians
who aspire to a Western life-style, this 2005 development contains two multiplex cinemas
showing the latest Hollywood blockbusters, branches of European fashion chains
including H & M, Zara and Next, food courts offering McDonalds, KFC and Pizza Hut,
a Body Shop, Mothercare, an Apple store and a Virgin megastore.
Tan and Rudby (2008) note that English has replaced Russian as the preferred
foreign language in China with “governments encouraging citizens to learn [it] and
parents persuading, even forcing, their children to speak it” (p. 3). This phenomenon may
not necessarily be restricted to China. Perhaps it might be found almost anywhere in the
world as the need for English continues to spread. And yet, as Rudby (2008) suggests,
25
children may grow up alienated from or lacking interest in their native culture (and
language). Languages, perhaps, may no longer be considered expressions of culture or
even tools for communication but as tools in fashioning commercial and economic
advantage (Modiano, 2001; Tan & Rudby, 2008), or political leverage. Where
globalization has made national boundaries ‘porous’, “the ‘soft power’ of English neo-
colonialism is positioned to control minds even more completely” (Rudby, 2008, p. 136)
through the Internet, satellite communication and the apparent triumph of capitalism as a
socio-economic model (Holborow, 1999). A further concern may lie in the possibility that
“English virtually Anglo-Americanizes the non-native speaker. Because English is such
a dominant force in world affairs, there is a danger that its spread dilutes the
distinguishing characteristics of other languages and cultures” (Modiano, 2001, p. 341).
2.1.2 English and Englishes, native speakers and non-native speakers
Bourne (1996) states that most English speakers “have learnt English as an additional
language, and [that] much of this learning has taken place at least partly within the formal
confines of a language classroom” (p. 189) whilst Hall (2011) reports that the smallest
group of English users worldwide is that comprising ‘native speakers’ or people who
acquired English unconsciously and use it as a first language (see p. 232 below).
Consequently, if native speakers are a minority, the English language itself may no longer
be claimed as the ‘property’ of any one particular group (Gray, 2010a; Modiano, 2001),
especially if it is being learned by people for possible interaction with other non-native
speakers. Holborow (1999) writes that, “internationally, more and more English speakers
speak English as a second or third language with non-native speakers probably now
making up the majority worldwide” (p. 2). Nonetheless, Hall (2011) suggests that the type
of English most students want to learn is still ‘Standard English’, or English as a Native
Language (ENL), and that native speakers are still the most highly regarded, and highly
sought, teachers. In addition, the textbooks, syllabuses, international testing such as
IELTS and the Common European Framework (CEFR) seem based upon and even
promote ENL and may not be able to accommodate regional variants.
“Most textbooks,” writes Hall, “continue to focus on native speaker lives,
lifestyles and language varieties… Thus, like syllabuses…, textbooks are not ‘neutral’
but reflect a particular view of society” (2011, p. 214). Valdes (1986) suggests American
textbooks promote baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolets, “clean, wholesome
living, simple pleasures in life that represent ‘the American Way’ ” (p.140), where
American views of independence and autonomy centre on the Self as opposed to other
26
cultures where familial or societal values may define and shape individual freedoms and
limit personal independence. Further, Gray (2010a) suggests that many course-books
assume a familiarity with or interest in British or American pop culture, with activities or
texts about, for example, Elvis Presley or Marilyn Monroe, and he claims that such
teaching materials promote a consumerist Western way of life along with a Westernized
native-speaker model of English as implicitly and inherently superior to local variants. In
addition, ‘good’ language learners are defined, using Western paradigms, as self-reliant
risk-takers tolerant of ambiguity (Hall, 2011), comfortable and able to “talk openly and
honestly about one’s feelings while listening non-judgementally to… [others]” (Cameron,
2002, p. 75). Other possible strategies such as imitation, rote-learning and memorization
are rejected as old-fashioned and inappropriate.
Holliday (2005) suggests the world and culture of English Language Teaching are
dominated by an “innovative, often predatory culture of integrated skills… located in the
private sector or in commercially run language centres in universities and colleges in
Britain, Australasia and North America (BANA)” (or abroad through organizations like
the British Council) who tell the others not only how to teach and learn the English
language, but what English to teach and learn (p. 3). He claims that (p. 13) non-native
speakers need constantly to affirm their professional status in a way native speakers do
not and has written, in Hall and Hewings (2001) and in his own book of 2005, of an ‘Us
and Them’ approach in English Language Teaching, where local stakeholders are
presented as inferior or deficient in their knowledge, pedagogy and methodology. These
differences are summarized in Table 1 below, but the qualities listed in the first column
are viewed as positive, the ones in the second negative.
THE UNPROBLEMATIC NATIVE
SPEAKER (US)
THE PROBLEMATIC NON-NATIVE
SPEAKER (THEM)
Global travelling, native speaker experts Local, inward-looking non-native
speakers
Proficient in new technology Lack technological awareness
Can manage, research, evaluate, organize,
train, understand and empower others
Need to be managed, trained, involved,
understood and empowered
Autonomous, independent, individual,
creative, original, democratic, egalitarian,
free-thinking meritocrats
Collectivist, hierarchical, uncritical,
dependent, undemocratic, passive, easily
dominated nepotists
Respects choice, equality and freedom Reluctant to challenge authority
Modern, Western Traditional, ‘Oriental’, Islamic etc.
Analytical, objective, flexible, critical,
negotiating and constructing knowledge
Uncritical, rigid, stative, fixed view of
knowledge
Table 1: Us and Them: some differences between native and non-native speakers of English,
adapted from Holliday, 2001, pp. 174-5, and 2005, pp. 19-20.
27
In every way, the local, non-native speaker is portrayed as inferior and the
language used to describe them is negative. They are ‘rigid’, ‘uncritical’, ‘undemocratic’
and ‘lacking’ whilst the native speaker is ‘flexible’, ‘democratic’ and respects personal
choice, qualities, perhaps, that drive the neoliberal consumerism that seems to have
become the dominant force in the modern world. However, these lists are devised by
practitioners from Britain, Australasia and North America, the BANA countries acting as
gatekeepers to the language. “Almost everywhere,” Holliday says, “Modernity is
presumed to be a characteristic exclusive to the West” (ibid., p.20) but the definition of
modernity itself is a Western one, as is the concept of native speaker.
Block and Cameron (2002) describe the “idealization of the native speaker as
someone who has perfect, innate knowledge of the language and culture and thus is the
best teacher of English” (p. 21). Furthermore, Singh and Han (2008) claim that “in some
places native English speakers are recruited to teach the language, sometimes without any
relevant educational or linguistic qualifications” (p. 220). They support their claim with
examples from a Chinese list of 71 English as a Foreign Language teachers, 69 native
speakers, 11 lacking degrees, 47 with no training or teaching qualifications and one just
19 years old. This is the kind of situation that underpins this research, its assumptions and
key questions. “The recruitment,” they continue, “Of unqualified and inexperienced
Anglophone speakers as English language teachers is a sign of the market value of this
variety of the language. In terms of its commodity value, the English of native speakers
is regarded as superior” (ibid., p. 220) even to non-native speaker trained, qualified
teachers. This is despite the possibility that “a native speaker may have limited vocabulary
and low grammatical competence while the reverse may be true of a non-native speaker”
(Jenkins, 2009, p. 20). Phillipson (1992) states that the native speaker tenet “has no
scientific validity” noting that it “dates from a time when language teaching was
indistinguishable from culture teaching” (p. 195) and when the native speaker might be
better informed than the non-native speaker about cultural matters. This seems to indicate
the true value of the native speaker is not necessarily as a teacher but as a cultural
ambassador, promotor or even salesperson for the BANA countries, their universities,
and their commercial products.
The pervasiveness of the native-speaker ideal, however, can be demonstrated by
research conducted by Timmis in 2000 when a questionnaire survey of 400 international
students and 15 face-to-face interviews found that a majority of students viewed “native-
speaker pronunciation as a benchmark of achievement” (2002, p. 242) and that “there
[was] still some desire among students to conform to native-speaker norms, and this
28
desire is not necessarily restricted to those students who use or anticipate using English
primarily with native speakers” (p. 248). This apparent aspiration of students to speak
Standard English or English as a Native Language (ENL) at native-speaker level may be
unwelcome to some, and indeed Timmis notes that “teachers seem to be moving away
from native-speaker norms faster than students are” (2002, p. 248). However, in a private,
and commercial, language centre, the student is a fee-paying consumer, a customer. If the
customer requires English as a Native Language, and Native English Speaker Teachers
(NESTs), because they believe this is a “benchmark of achievement” (op. cit.), then this
is what the market must supply. The customer may, of course, be wrong, but such a view
would be inconsistent in a neoliberal framework where the private market, and by
extension the consumer, is always right.
2.1.3 The global politics of English Language Teaching
Teaching the English Language may be as much a political act as an educational one
(Hall, 2011) and the variant of English taught may be equally political. As Holborow
points out, “English is either the modernizing panacea or the ruthless oppressor,
depending on your place in the world” (1999, p.1). She states that, because “language is
shared territory [with] its meaning [taking] shape on the uncertain ground between
people” (ibid., p. 30), a matter such as vocabulary choice becomes an ideological issue.
For example, some writers use ‘downsizing’ rather than ‘redundancy’ or
‘unemployment’, ‘surgical strike’ rather than ‘bombing’, ‘peacekeepers’ rather than
‘soldiers’, ‘unborn child’ rather than ‘foetus’, ‘collateral damage’ rather than ‘killing
civilians,’ and ‘friendly fire’ rather than ‘shooting the wrong people’. Holborow suggests
that choice of language betrays a political positioning and indicates that some writers
perceive English Language Teaching, its promotion of English as a Native Language as
a Standard English and its mass employment of Native English Speaker Teachers as a
means through which the governments of Britain, Australasia and North America advance
their economic, commercial and geopolitical interests. Indeed, the whole field of Applied
Linguistics and international education can appear, to some, to have been shaped to
further Western neo-colonialist interests through its support of ‘Native Speaker’ Standard
English. For instance, some commentators “perceive this process as linguistic
imperialism, pointing out that government agencies and private enterprises, primarily in
the United Kingdom and the United States of America, export educational materials and
operate language schools as a way to extend their influence” (Modiano, 2001, p. 340).
29
This perception is considered in Chapter Six of the thesis (Section 6.3.3) in the light of
research data from a group of non-native speaker teachers (NNESTs).
Jenkins (2009) claims that English originally spread through Asia and Africa
because native speaker colonisers wanted a work-force that could communicate with
them whilst suggesting that the global dominance of English can be attributed to a
combination of the economic power of the USA and the UK’s colonial past which affords
it and its language an entry-point into many countries. In Linguistic Imperialism (1992),
Phillipson describes the use of English Language Teaching and the invention of the
British Council in 1934 by the British Government as an international cultural
counterweight to Nazi Germany’s Goethe Institute and the propaganda of Fascist Italy.
He suggests that, through the 1950s and 1960s, English Language Teaching was used to
maintain British influence in former colonies as they became independent, and then in the
1970s and 1980s both the USA and the United Kingdom used English Language Teaching
as a tool in the Cold War struggle to contain the influence of Communism in susceptible
regions of the world. Now, in the twenty-first century, the English Language Teaching
industry may be serving the interests of international business, furthering globalization
and leading everyone into a homogenized, vaguely ‘Western’ aspirational consumer-
driven life-style which generates commercial profit for large corporations. Private
language centres, particularly those which belong to organizations based in the United
Kingdom, the USA, Canada or Australia may seem more effective places to promote
those interests than schools run and maintained by local governments.
Pennycook (1996) claims that “despite its claims to independence and autonomy,
the British Council is… an institution supportive of British commercial and political
interests. It has always had the goal of spreading the English language as far as possible
and this has been for political and commercial reasons” (p. 150). He underlines this claim
by suggesting that, in 1953, the British Council founded the English Language Teaching
Journal (now the ELT Journal), the leading peer-reviewed academic journal in the field.
In addition, the British Council, he says, founded Edinburgh University’s Department of
Applied Linguistics in 1957, the first of its kind in the United Kingdom, to develop
English Language Teaching into an academic discipline with a research-base to inform
and underpin teaching practice. In addition, the British Council seems to promote BANA-
based English Language Teaching methodologies and philosophies over other, local
approaches and whilst it might not actively promote ‘native speaker worship’, the British
Council could, perhaps, be perceived as promoting the notion of Standard English, in this
case English as a Native Language, as the target language through its English Language
30
courses, the examinations it supports, the endorsement of certain teacher training
programmes, the accreditation of language centres that meet its criteria and the teaching
methods it extols.
Pennycook (1996) appears to suggest that the British Council, in effect, invented
Applied Linguistics and English Language Teaching as they are practised today and
actively works to maintain the dominance of a particular variety of the English language
itself. This variety, and the “consensus [which made it] the most desirable variety of
English took shape within a narrow social stratum and according to the value judgements
of those within it; [Standard English was] what ‘persons of quality’ spoke” (Holborow,
1999, pp.167-168). It was, and perhaps remains, the dialect of the educated, ‘good’
English being “synonymous with that of educated native speakers born and bred in the
United Kingdom or North America” (Jenkins, 2009, p. 58) and promoted and perpetuated
by that elite as a universal standard to which all should aspire whilst the local variant is
something to be deplored, or replaced.
Gray (2010a) labels English Language Teaching ‘a service industry’ where
students are customers and teachers are “facilitators of language learning, technicists
trained solely to develop language skills” (p. 172). Commercial English Language
Teaching in particular, he suggests, depends almost wholly for its financial viability on
“minimally trained teachers who form part of a largely casualized labour force…. This
industry does not require a workforce with more than a few weeks’ of training” (p. 181),
or, in the case of Young Learner teaching, no training. Phillipson (1992) describes the
training as “narrowly technical” (p. 256), because the academic base of English Language
Teaching drew not on theories of education or teaching but on linguistics and learning.
Thus the teacher training “concentrated on classroom techniques and materials production
rather than social and cognitive prerequisites for learning” (p. 256). This, Phillipson
believes, is because the training needs to be ‘universally relevant’ and Howatt (2004)
suggests that there was, in Applied Linguistics research, “a conviction that the underlying
theories of language and language learning were ‘scientific’ and hence largely unaffected
by local variables” (p. 301). Thus one-size-fits-all technical training may be appropriate
because the basic principles are decontextualized and therefore transferrable, and that is
the underlying principle of Cambridge’s Certificate in English Language Teaching to
Adults, and its higher-level Diploma (see Chapter Two, 2.5 below). It is also true of its
Young Learner extension course.
Pennycook (1996, p. 159) believes “the export of applied linguistic theory and of
Western-trained language teachers constantly promotes inappropriate teaching
31
approaches to diverse settings… [and] sanctifies a range of teaching practices which have
their ideological underpinnings firmly based in other Western ideologies” (p. 164). He
believes that teaching practices may be ideological choices based on particular views of
education, teaching and learning rooted in cultural values, and therefore not transferrable
because not appropriate. Both he and Phillipson (1992) see the demarcation of English
Language Teaching (universal principles) from the context in which it is delivered (local
needs) as problematic. Pennycook (1996) also views the ‘divorce’ of applied linguistics
from educational theory (p. 299) as a particular issue for a discipline that he regards as
invented to give a ‘cloak of respectability’ to the teaching of English as a foreign language
‘overseas’. Meanwhile, Phillipson (1992) expresses concern over “the rapid elevation to
expert status of many native speakers of English, after a limited period of teaching
experience… with a strong likelihood that this experience was [gained] outside any
education system” (p. 254). These issues are explored in this thesis in the context of
Teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners in private language schools.
2.1.4 The commodification of the English language
Graddol (1997) notes that “the future of British English in the world will depend in part
on continued, careful management of its ‘brand image’… [and] an appreciation of the
importance of British audio-visual products in projecting an image of Britain as a leader
of style and popular culture” (p. 227). It is that ‘brand image’ and the perception of ‘Cool
Britannia’ as a place to do business with that gives rise to the packaging and promotion
of English as both a consumer product and a customer service. “These are,” say Singh
and Han, “Sold by a range of English language providers to mostly eager consumers
throughout the world. Recruiting international students is driven by the globalization of
higher education and English” (2008, p. 206) thus fostering new opportunities to market
and sell English examinations and courses to prospective students, or immigrants, or
business people who need to reach a certain standard of Standard English to enter the
appropriate community. Singh and Han claim that “English products and services are
marketed worldwide through images and imaginings of modernization, globalization,
self-development and the enjoyment of a cosmopolitan life” ((2008, p. 210) whilst Gray
(2010a) writes that the English Language Teaching course-book presents an “assumption
that ‘aspirational’ content which is exclusively life-style oriented is motivating” (p.175),
reflecting the politics that underlie the neoliberalism of personal consumption and the
privatized free market.
32
Phillipson (1992) describes English Language Teaching as “a boom subject
expanding on [a] narrow professional base…, monolingual and anglo-centric and
tend[ing] to ignore the wider context of its operation” (p. 300). This may be particularly
true for private sector Young Learner English Language Teaching where teachers may be
undertrained and underqualified and where the curriculum taught may not relate to that
of the host country’s school system. Teaching English to Young Learners, and English
Language Teaching more generally, are, however, also ‘boom industries’ which generate
large profits for the companies involved.
Gray (2010b, p. 717) suggests that “some languages are commodified in the
globalized economy in the sense that they are marketed primarily in terms of their
perceived economic usefulness” (ibid., p. 729). English appears to have become one such
language, packaged, bought and sold, a commodity for trade and a lucrative business
opportunity in the global education market (Senior, 2006). This research is situated in that
context, where entrepreneurs can open language centres to sell the English language for
private and personal profit.
2.2 The global demand for English Language Teaching to Young Learners
Since the late 1990s, there has been a significant increase in the demand for English
Language Teaching to ever-younger children across the world (Ellis & Knagg, 2012;
Emery, 2012; Garton, Copland & Burns, 2011), with expansion not just in primary
English Language Teaching provision but, in some parts of the world, pre-primary and
even pre-natal language education (Enever, 2011). In 2012, the British Council estimated
that 70 per cent of all English language learners in the world were under 18 years old with
4 to 500 million aged under 11 accounting for 50 per cent of all English Language
learners. These learners were being taught by some 6 million teachers (Ellis & Knagg,
2012). This has been perceived as a major and perhaps permanent shift in the English
Language Teaching market rather than a minor trend (Cameron, 2003; Ellis & Knagg,
2012) which might require a similar shift in the resourcing and staffing of language
schools and the appropriate pre-service training of teachers (Emery, 2012).
There appear to be several reasons for this growth in demand for English
Language Teaching to Young Learners. In addition to national socio-economic and geo-
political needs and parental ambitions for their children (Ellis, 2013), there seems to be a
widespread belief that younger children learn languages more quickly and more
successfully than older children or adults (Brewster, Ellis & Girard, 2002; Brown, 2000;
Garton, et al., 2011; Hall, 2011; Pinter, 2011; Rixon, 2000) despite a lack of conclusive
33
evidence that this is so (Cameron, 2003; Cook, 2010; Copland & Garton, 2014; Ellis &
Knagg, 2012; Hall, 2011; Johnstone, 2009; Lightbown & Spada, 1999; Moon, 2005;
Muñoz, 2006; Muñoz & Singleton, 2011; Pinter, 2006, 2011; Scovel, 1999). Some
research, in fact, indicates that factors such as parental attitude, exposure to foreign
culture and media and international travel may be as or more important than formal tuition
in aiding a young learner’s language development (Enever, 2011; Enever & Moon, 2009;
Scovel, 1999). “Age,” writes Phillipson (1992), “cannot be isolated from a mass of other
relevant factors” (p. 208).
In addition, only a small percentage of learners will ever use English for
international communication (Rogers, 1982; Scovel, 1999). Consequently, if “the
theoretical and empirical research bases for expanding the teaching of English as a foreign
language to young learners, especially in foreign language contexts, are not very firm”
(Cameron, 2003, p. 106), “there may not necessarily be immediate linguistic benefits in
teaching English to young learners” (Cambridge ESOL, TKT Handbook 2012, p. 3), yet
“parents all over the world put their children in language schools at an early age,
convinced that the earlier they start learning, the better” (Pinter, 2011, p. 49). Parental
demand requires political response (Ellis, 2013; Enever, 2011; Enever & Moon, 2009;
Rixon, 1992) and political response requires structural change.
Recent research on the provision of English Language Teaching to Young
Learners (by Copland, Garton & Burns, 2014; Ellis, 2013; Emery, 2012; Garton, 2014;
Rixon, 2000, 2013) seems to have focused on the implications at national political level
for expanding English into primary curricula and has ranged from single countries such
as South Korea (Garton, 2014) to seven in Europe (Enever, 2011) to 144 across the world
(Garton, et al., 2011). This research has highlighted variations in pedagogy, provision,
resourcing, syllabus content and assessment methods not just across countries but
regionally within countries, between rural and urban, inland and coastal, resulting in
educational inequality (Garton, et al., 2011) and a widespread shortage of primary school
English teachers with the appropriate skills (Cameron, 2003; Emery, 2012; Garton, 2014).
Fernandes (2013) for example reported an increase in the number of English teachers
working in Brazilian primary schools from 800 in 2010 to 1,864 in 2013 but that many of
these teachers had never worked with children before. Such a large and rapid expansion
must, however, have significant resource implications for the Brazilian government, for
instance the training, and paying, of the 1,000 teachers concerned.
The teaching of English classes in primary schools, then, seems as much a political
issue as an educational one. Finding and training sufficient teachers to staff a significant
34
sector expansion may require investment in teacher education (Enever, 2011; Garton, et
al., 2011) and the provision of opportunities for the continuing development of teaching
skills, techniques and knowledge (Emery, 2012; Garton, et al., 2011). Whilst in some
countries secondary school English teachers, teachers of subjects other than English or
English-speaking teachers of adults might be transferred to primary schools, with or
without retraining (Copland, et al., 2014; Emery, 2012), others appear to prefer to import
native speaker teachers (NESTs) from abroad (Garton, et al., 2011), hiring contract
teachers or “Western expatriates… [on] teaching vacations” (Emery, 2012, p. 10), what
Maley terms the “see China and die brigade” (1986, p. 106). The pedagogies and curricula
underpinning the teaching of English as a Foreign Language to young learners may also
need developing (Cameron, 2003; Rixon, 1992) and some state-maintained schools will
inevitably struggle to meet these challenges (Copland, et al., 2014). Some will be under-
resourced. Some will be understaffed. Some will fail. Consequently, some parents may
come to perceive their state-maintained schools as delivering ‘poor quality’ English
Language teaching (Ellis, 2013; Hettiarachchi, 2010; McKay, 1992; Nunan, 2003; Rixon,
2000; Rogers, 1982) and invest in supplementary, extra-curricular and private English
lessons (Cameron, 2003; Ellis, 2013; Garton, et al., 2011) and/or summer courses, either
at home or in the UK (Pinter, 2006).
Rixon (2000) writes that, in 1999 in Bangladesh, a country where “English has a
high market value and public primary schools are perceived to be poor at teaching it” (p.
19), 5 per cent of children attended private language schools. In Colombia this was 10 per
cent, in Bahrain 15 to 20 per cent and in the Czech Republic 20 per cent. In Greece, where
“English is regarded as essential to future education and employment, [the] goal is
Cambridge FCE [First Certificate in English] by age 14, CPE [Certificate of Proficiency
in English] by age 16 [and]… parents do not think highly of public sector provision” (p.
52) it is over 90 per cent. In Argentina (p. 8), Bahrain (p. 15), Bangladesh (p. 18), the
Czech Republic (p. 34), Ecuador (p. 38) and Ukraine (p. 161) students at private schools
are perceived to have higher levels of English. In Croatia they are said to “have better
conditions” (p. 27) than the state-maintained schools whilst in Greece, along with more
attractive course-books, videos and computers, there is a sense that “‘real’ language
learning takes place in the language schools, not in the public schools” (p. 51). In Hong
Kong, the methodology is different and “parents… prefer native speakers” (p. 56) whilst
in Pakistan (p. 108), private schools “have better qualified teachers, different books – in
most cases they use books and materials published internationally – and a better
atmosphere.” Smaller class sizes, less emphasis on grammar and wider use of technology
35
are reported in Poland (p. 115). In Russia the students can have more hours of English in
a private school than in a public one (p. 123). In the U.A.E. parents use private schools
“to make up for shortcomings in schools in terms of resources and inexperienced
teachers” (p. 158). In essence there seems a widespread, world-wide dissatisfaction with
state provision of English Language Teaching to Young Learners, a dissatisfaction which
has fuelled an expansion in a private sector “swift to seize on this new [business]
opportunity” (Rixon, 1992, p. 74).
Ellis (2013) conducted online research into why parents send their children to
private English lessons at the British Council. She reported that the Council had (in 2013)
some 300,000 learners of English world-wide, with 130,000 Young Learners in 85
different locations attending ‘out-of-school’ English lessons. Ellis received 5,039
responses and found the most important reason given by parents was that “English is now
seen as a basic life-skill and career enhancer for a child’s future in a globalized world”
(p. 2). This belief gives impetus to new business opportunities, especially where public
confidence in state provision is low. Rixon (2013) noted that some countries, like Sweden
and Germany, have very few private language schools because there is “public confidence
in the quality of state-provided English education” (p. 43) whilst others, presumably
where there is less confidence, have a “vigorous [private] system” running alongside
mainstream schools. She indicates that eight countries (China, Croatia, Egypt, Japan,
Sierra Leone, Spain, South Africa and Taiwan) have between 40 and 59 per cent of
primary-age learners attending out-of-school English lessons whilst five countries
(Bahrain, Cyprus, Greece, Serbia and Sri Lanka) have more than 60 per cent of their
children studying in private language centres, because “the provision for English
language teaching by private language institutes is popularly believed to be superior”
(Rixon, 2013, p. 44). As Ellis remarks (2013, p. 1), “private providers are now
contributing to the linguistic future of the next generations,” and yet there is little
published research into the way this private sector works, how it is regulated, or what
quality-control mechanisms exist. Rixon reports an observation from Spain that “most of
[the private language schools] are not of good quality. Most teaching… is delivered by
non-qualified teachers and in many cases by adult EFL teachers who are neither aware of
nor interested in how to approach the teaching of a language to children” (2013, p. 44).
This is the basic assumption underlying this thesis: that most teaching of English as a
foreign language to young learners in the private sector is done by teachers of English to
adults who have little, if any, understanding of how to teach children.
36
The apparently limited research into what Crookes (2009) terms a “vast and
shadowy… sector of ELT” (p. 20) may stem from difficulties of access. State schools can
be approached through Ministries of Education. Private schools probably need to be
approached directly. In addition, some small private language centres could be operating
on the fringes or may simply be unknown to researchers unfamiliar with the local market.
For instance, according to one website, three chains based in the United Kingdom which
operate in Moscow, Russia, alongside 16 other schools of less clear parentage. There are
46 language schools in Bangkok, Thailand, and 14 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (ESL Base,
2013). Further, the industry website tefl.com advertises teaching jobs on behalf of some
21,000 employers (tefl.com, 2014). Gathering data from these, and the unknown number
not listed on this website, would be challenging, particularly if the researcher’s time and
resources are limited. The private sector is indeed “vast and shadowy” (Crookes, 2009,
p. 20), yet it is highly influential as it responds to the “growing demand for private English
classes for children” (Bourne, 1996, p. 190). In addition, the number and range of
countries in which such private schools operate indicates how the English language has
become both a global commodity and a business opportunity.
2.3 Teaching English to Young Learners in the private language sector
Because its very existence is determined by the market, the private language sector must
be responsive and flexible as students are essentially “short-term paying customers”
(Holliday, 2005, p. 57) who demand value for money.
Some private language centres may offer short-term courses with “more limited
language objectives, for example conversational or reading skills” (McKay, 1992, p. 113),
courses tailored to meet specific client needs, courses targeting specific examinations
such as IELTS, and courses aimed at Young Learners. They can employ the latest
curricula, the most up-to-date, age-appropriate materials and technologies and well
trained specialist teachers with Young Learner-friendly methodologies. They may
provide “more advanced classes, have a different methodology and use materials
imported from the UK” (Rixon, 2000, p. 8) as well as a wider range of classes meeting
more intensively (McKay, 1992). Class sizes may be smaller than those in state schools
(Rixon, 2000) and streamed by competence rather than age. Consequently “private
schools are viewed as providing ‘quality’ education in contrast to underfunded mass
education in the state sector with large classes and poorly qualified teachers” (Enever &
Moon, 2009, p. 8) and Gibbons (1989) notes a correlation between parental income and
demand for English language lessons. A state-managed sector with national curricula,
37
centrally determined and cross-sector uniformity of English teaching methods, numbers
of directed hours of tuition and centralised assessment systems cannot be so responsive
to individual customer needs or demands. For example, Garton (2014) reports that the
South Korean government dictates not only how many English words must be in the
primary curriculum but how many words constitute a sentence. Private language centres,
especially those run by external organizations such as the British Council, do not have to
conform to such constraints, allowing both teacher and learner to construct courses
directly relevant to their priorities.
Some language centres are franchises or branches of global chains, networks of
teaching centres with outlets in several countries (Senior, 2006). For example,
International House has 150 centres in 50 countries across the world (International House,
2013). Primarily businesses, their success depends upon enrolments and fee payments
and yet the teaching methodologies and materials they may use, the communicative
curricula they might follow and the native English speaker teachers they often employ
can be perceived as more up-to-date and more authoritative than the local provision,
especially if they are part of a globally prestigious organization (Rixon, 2000).
The British Council, “on the ground in six continents and over 100 countries,”
(British Council, 2013), the University of Cambridge through its assessment and
examinations department, and publishers including Cambridge University Press, Oxford
University Press, MacMillan and Longman Pearson are able to influence the development
of English Language Teaching in many countries around the world, even “to transform
whole education systems” (ibid.), through the Teacher Knowledge Test (TKT) perhaps,
or other training programmes and consultancies, as well as assessments and qualifications
such as the International General Certificate of Secondary Education (IGCSE) and the
provision of mass-marketed UK-produced but globally distributed course materials such
as Oxford University Press’ Headway course, first published in 1986, Pearson Longman’s
Cutting Edge (1998) or Oxford University Press’s English File (1997). Whether they are
appropriate for a country’s educational context is another matter (Gray, 2010b; Holliday,
2005). They are approved, promoted and disseminated by the English Language Teaching
industry. Organizations like the British Council and Oxford and Cambridge Universities
are globally respected and prestigious, and perceived as experts in the field, so their
products sell, and book series like Headway, regarded as ‘icons’ of the industry (Holliday,
2005), influence course-book and syllabus design, structure and content (Gray, 2010b)
across the globe. According to Gray (2010b), “sales from the [Headway] course alone
were sufficient to fund an entire publishing house” (p. 719), showing the operational scale
38
and the lucrative nature of this aspect of the industry, to the tune of £200 million a year
(Block & Gray, 2015).
But, just like their state-school counterparts, private language centres, faced with
a growing demand for English Language Teaching to Young Learners, must also seek
appropriately trained and qualified staff and provide for their development. Simply
because it is supplementary learning does not mean standards should be low or the quality
of the product poor. Parents invest considerable sums of money in these places and
consequently have high expectations (Ellis, 2013). In addition, the survival of the
business may depend on retention and recruitment of fee-paying students in sufficient
numbers to at least break even. Such schools stand or fall on their reputation and their
market-positioning. It may, therefore, be in everyone’s interests for the quality of tuition
to be as good as possible, with teachers and centres “providing learning experiences that
are age and context-appropriate, relevant and which build confidence and self-esteem”
(Ellis, 2013, p. 2), especially since the global expansion in the demand for English
Language Teaching has created “considerable opportunities for entrepreneurs [and
international chains] …to open up independent language schools” all over the world
(Senior 2006, pp. 229-230).
This research focuses on those providers of out-of-school learning, the schools
and the people who teach in them, because such schools can contribute to the shaping and
development of state provision, because parents seem to trust them with their children’s
English language learning at the earliest stages and because they employ thousands of
teachers across the globe. In addition, investigating private language centre practice may
provide new knowledge about this under-researched sector of teaching English as a
foreign language to Young Learners.
2.4 Teachers of English to Young Learners
For a number of children, their English teacher may be “the major source of language
input” (Pinter, 2006, p. 45) or, in some situations, “the only source” (Moon, 2000, p. 14),
yet English Language teachers form a “part-time, transient work-force with low academic
qualifications and low earning power” which, because of a demand for NS teachers
abroad, is able to “propel itself into the professional domains of other education systems
in other countries” (Holliday, 2005, pp. 27 & 29). Unfortunately, according to one former
teacher, many become “burnt-out, skill-less and unemployable, their working lives a
wasteland, their future oblivion, a pretty sad lot” (Cresswell-Turner, 2004, p. 5). The
globally mobile, international English Language teacher, responsible for educating
39
thousands of people across the world, may not, if Cresswell-Turner and Holliday are right,
be ‘fit for purpose’.
“Teachers of EFL/ESOL come into the field from diverse routes” (Woodward,
1996, p. 4) and for diverse reasons and “many…do not do so because they wish to be
teachers primarily” (Crookes, 2010, p. 20). Senior (2006) suggests that for some it is the
experience of living abroad, for others something to do before or after university, and for
others a change of life direction, because of redundancy, family issues, limited career
prospects, lack of fulfilment, boredom at work or simple dissatisfaction with life at home
(Johnston, 2007). Others, already teachers, may be “refugees from the failing public
[school] system” (Senior, 2006, p. 38), trained and experienced teachers who still want
to teach but are disillusioned with aspects of education in their home country. Other
motives may include pay, security, holidays, love of subject and a desire to work with
people (Huberman, 1993, p. 109). In addition, qualified English Language teachers can
have a global job-centre. Indeed the possibility of global mobility “is…the reason that
many people become EFL teachers” in the first place (Impey & Underhill, 1994, p. 58).
In November 2012, 285 English Language Teaching jobs were advertised on the
recruitment website www.tefl.com. Most positions required native speakers with an
English Language Teaching qualification, most were based in private language centres
and most were available immediately. Of the 285 jobs, 29 were in Spain, 22 in Italy, 54
in China and 26 in the Middle East. One position, with in-house accommodation
provided, required an English Language tutor for the staff of the Four Seasons Resort in
the Maldives. On a cold, wet February morning in England, one might well be tempted.
For example, this writer, in February 2002, left a challenging secondary school in snowy
northern England for a small private language centre on the sunny Russian Black Sea
coast, securing job, flight, flat and visa within two weeks.
A similar examination of the same website (www.tefl.com) two years later, on
December 1, 2014, displayed 332 jobs, with 17 posted in the past 24 hours and 20, 925
registered employers using the site to advertise teaching positions. On the homepage was
an advertisement for a post in Thailand. It promised “6/12 month contracts, competitive
salaries, visa sponsorship, orientation plus many more benefits. Optional one week
teaching practice in Bangkok before your contract starts. From £595” (tefl.com, 2014).
In this job, pre-service training appeared to be optional. Of the 332 jobs, 196 were in
Europe (45 in Spain, 42 in Italy), 89 in Asia or the ‘Far East’ (47 in China, many with the
newly established Disney English Schools which have Mickey Mouse as their logo) and
37 in the Middle East (27 in Saudi Arabia). Jobs were advertised in 51 countries. It is a
40
teacher’s market, and although salaries are relatively low, the opportunity to combine
travelling with teaching has never seemed better. This is a global business, with global
possibilities.
Teaching English as a Foreign Language, however, is not risk-free. Even within
large chains, employer quality is unpredictable with possible job insecurity, few
opportunities for promotion or interesting, varied work and sometimes poor working
conditions (Senior, 2006). In addition, a lack of work in summer, when centres may be
closed for school holidays, means some teachers might have to work in the UK “at some
miserable summer-school” (Cresswell-Turner, 2004, p. 2). In addition, the language
centres themselves can be “miserable places, bucket-shops… (or) employment agencies”
sending teachers out into other people’s workplaces for a “whacking great commission”
(Cresswell-Turner, 2004, p. 4). One really does not know until one gets there. Of course,
if it does not work out, “the teacher can always jump on a plane and return home” (Senior,
2006, pp. 56-57) or go elsewhere. After all, it is a big world and there are hundreds of
jobs for a native speaker of English. English Language Teaching is a ‘permeable’
occupation (Maley, 1992), easy to join, easy to leave, with no agreed or consistently
applied entry qualifications or career pathways, and embracing everyone, from students
on gap years to older people embarking on second careers. It is flexible, eclectic and
diverse (Senior, 2006, p. 39), able to accommodate a breadth of motive, ambition, age,
background and circumstance and offer second, third or fourth careers. None of the
teachers investigated by Johnston (1997), Bailey (1997) or Tsui (2003), for instance,
chose English Language Teaching as a first-choice career. Consequently, the industry can
be perceived as consisting of “educated but unfocused young people… [who] get quick
entry into a job they don’t have to take too seriously” (Meddings, 2004, p. 1), something
“my neighbour’s daughter does” between leaving school and starting university (Senior,
2006, p. 37). “It is a low status, even slightly disreputable thing to do” (Thornbury, 2001,
p. 391), although Disney English’s banner advertisement on www.tefl.com declares
“teaching is your gift” (tefl.com, 2014) as it seeks to persuade people to teach English to
children in China using Walt Disney’s characters, and stories such as Snow White and
Aladdin, as their base resources. For the Disney School, the preferred qualifications
include an internationally recognized English Language Teaching qualification such as
the Cambridge or Trinity English Language Teaching certificates, but not a qualification
in teaching English to children since both these training courses are concerned with
preparing people to teach adults. Essential, however, are fluency in spoken English (with
41
a ‘neutral’ accent), enthusiasm for teaching young children and the ability to stand, squat
and bend (Disney, 2014).
Admission to Cambridge’s pre-service training courses does not require a degree
but “a standard of education equivalent to that required for entry into higher education”
(for example GCE A-Levels) although “centres may, at their discretion, accept candidates
who do not have formal qualifications at this level” (CELTYL Syllabus, 2010, p. 3). In
other words, people wishing to train as English Language Teachers do not need any
qualifications at all. It becomes difficult therefore to argue that ELT is a high-status
profession when one’s “ability to convince the public of… [one’s] expertise is always
compromised by the presence of under-qualified or unqualified practitioners” (Holliday,
2005, p. 28) or by the commercialism of some organizations intent on promoting
merchandise in the guise of language tuition. However, not all employers lack principles.
They might not be able to recruit and retain suitable teachers. Short notice, long distance,
specific organizational needs, cost, urgency, the nature of the position, a requirement for
specialist skills or knowledge may create a situation where they cannot find the right
teacher at the right time (Impey & Underhill, 1994), putting the school into the dilemma
of losing the contract or employing someone they know is not quite right and hope for the
best. This seems to apply particularly acutely to teaching English to Young Learners,
where there is a shortage of appropriately qualified teachers, especially at primary level
(Cameron, 2003; Emery, 2012; Garton, 2014).
Cameron suggests there is a belief in the English Language Teaching industry that
“teaching English [to YLs] is a straightforward process that can be undertaken by anyone
with a basic training in ELT [because] the language taught to children only needs to be
simple” (2001, p. xii). This may explain why some language centres employ teachers
qualified or trained to teach adults and then ask them to teach children’s classes as well.
Beddall observed “a broad polarity of opinion amongst teachers, who either love their
YL lessons or else wish that they did not have to do them” (2013, p. 4), perhaps because
they are unsure how to approach these classes or do not want to teach them.
Fröhlich-Ward suggests that Young Learner teachers should have an “ability to
communicate with [children], competence in the foreign language… [and] teaching
experience” (1991, p. 98) whilst Copland and Garton (2014) suggest “teachers need a
strong understanding of children’s social and cognitive development as well as a good
understanding of theories of second language acquisition in order to teach effectively” (p.
225). Pinter claims “it is useful for teachers to be familiar with the Piagetian framework
because teaching English to children can mean working with very different age groups
42
with different interests and needs” (2006, p. 6) but even if these suggestions seem
sensible, it may not actually be possible to recruit people who meet these criteria (Impey
& Underhill, 1994, p. 58) or know about Piaget’s theory of child development.
Briefly, this holds that children go through three main developmental stages. The
sensori-motor period (birth to 18 months) involves the child becoming aware of their
existence as a distinct individual who can organize movement and objects in space. The
concrete operational period (18 months to 11 years) sees the child performing actions
such as grouping, classifying, organizing or categorizing physical objects physically,
internalizing what those actions involve and being able to conceive those actions
mentally, to think about ordering, classifying etc. as concepts. The formal operational
period (11+) sees the child develop the ability to reason and work logically from
hypotheses and propositions, to deduce and infer and to plan systematically (Donaldson,
1978). Teachers may well find awareness of these stages useful in selecting and
sequencing age-appropriate learning activities and possibly in managing behaviour and
discipline. Understanding learners and learning may be critical elements of effective
teaching. This Piagetian framework, however, is not covered on the basic Cambridge
CELTA, nor on the YL extension to the CELTA. This researcher first encountered it as a
postgraduate student doing an MA in Teaching English to Young Learners, in addition to
the ideas of Vygotsky and Bruner. These ideas can also inform the decisions of the Young
Learner teacher, and enrich his or her understanding of how children learn and develop.
Bruner suggested children experience the world in three different ways, enactive,
involving physical contact with objects, iconic, where objects are represented by images
or pictures and symbolic, where images and objects are represented by symbols or signs,
for example words (Williams & Burden, 1997). He claimed that learning could be
“accelerated or enhanced by breaking [it] into stages and providing building blocks and
systems” (Brewster, et al., 2002, p. 30). Believing language and communication to be
critical elements in the evolution of knowledge and understanding (Brewster, 1991), he
suggested that adults might scaffold this evolution by using language to suggest, praise,
demonstrate and model, and through using fixed ‘formats and routines’ such as reading
bedtime stories (Cameron, 2001).
Vygotsky (1978), claiming that people, and children, are social beings, suggested
they can achieve more with the support of others than they can alone because people
construct meaning through interaction with others (Williams & Burden, 1997). In
addition, he suggested that “development and learning take place in a social context”
(Cameron, 2001, p. 6) stressing the importance of play in learning (Vygotsky, 1978).
43
Teachers too are social beings who might also achieve more with the support of
others. In addition, it seems that the teacher’s own attitude and motivation might be
important factors in fostering successful learning. “Attitudes tend to be derived from
[teachers’] own experiences as learners, their training, their teaching experience, their
interaction with colleagues and the values and norms of the society in which they work”
(Carless, 2001, p. 264). Yet there has been very little research into the motives of English
Language Teachers working in private language centres in foreign contexts. More
research into why people join this workforce and what they hope to get from it may help
trainers and employers understand teachers’ motivation, their training and development
needs, and consequently take appropriate care of them and their wellbeing. This study
attempts to provide some insights into this area.
2.5 Training for Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Young Learners
The most common pre-service training programmes in UK-based TEFL are the CELTA
and the Trinity Certificate in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL.
This last contains six hours of assessed teaching practice and has around 4,000 candidates
per year pursuing a four to six week course in around 100 centres worldwide with
assignments including a reflective journal, materials production, a learner profile,
language awareness and a one-to-one lesson (Trinity College, 2012). The Certificate of
English Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA), administered and validated by
Cambridge English in the UK, is “the most widely recognized TEFL qualification in the
world” (Cambridge English, 2012). Consequently, “possession of a CELTA is taken by
the industry to indicate a basic level of English language teaching capability, and it
functions as an indicator of employability in the largely deregulated global commercial
sector” (Block & Gray, 2015, p. 8). Around 10,000 certificates are issued annually
(Cambridge English, 2012) by Cambridge via their 286 accredited centres world-wide. It
can be done full-time in four weeks (Ferguson & Donno, 2003), requires 120 contact
hours, including six hours of assessed teaching practice, and “course content is limited to
language analysis for teaching purposes and CLT [communicative language teaching]
methodology” (Block & Gray, 2015, p. 8). It is assessed through four written assignments,
on adult learning, an aspect of the language system, a language skill and a reflection on
teaching practice (CELTA Syllabus, 2011). It aims to provide new teachers with a “basic
set of core techniques and skills with a high surrender value that can be employed in a
number of classroom situations to achieve a number of objectives depending on the
context and the way they are used” (Edwards, 1996, pp. 101-102), for example giving
44
instructions and using published materials, so that people can “begin working in a variety
of ESOL teaching contexts around the world” (CELTA Syllabus, 2011, p. 2). In short, it
seeks to provide a set of practical survival tips (Brandt, 2006a). However, these tips may
only be suited to the simulated context of the training course because the focus on skills-
building does not “support teacher autonomy or the ability to think critically about
teaching and teaching contexts” (Hobbs, 2013, p. 166). It also divorces theory from
practice (ibid.). “Excessively theoretical is not a charge that could be made against the
CELTA [with] all input closely linked to teaching practice” (Block & Gray, 2015, p. 8).
These are courses that help prepare people to teach English as a foreign language
to adults. They may be the only formalized, externally validated, accredited training an
English as a foreign language teacher undertakes (Ferguson & Donno, 2003; Senior,
2006). For those who wish to add a Young Learner element to their training portfolio,
several options appear to be available. Cambridge offers an ‘extension’ to the basic adult
certificate, which is reissued with a Young Learner teaching endorsement (ECC YL
Extension to CELTA Handbook, 2004). Its 54 hours include four hours of assessed
teaching practice with two different ability-levels and age groups and six hours of directed
observation. It is aimed at already-practising teachers with no or little experience of
Young Learner English language teaching, and its purpose is to help teachers “transfer
[their] knowledge and skills to a young learner context” (Cambridge English, 2012). It is
assessed through teaching practice and two written assignments, one on classroom
teaching, the other on “aspects of the teaching of English,” (Cambridge English, 2013).
It is available in 26 countries and 36 centres, 18, or half, of which are British Councils.
Trinity College also offer a course, the Teaching Young Learners Extension
Certificate, or TYLEC, a course offered through some British Council centres (in June
2014 these included Colombia, Greece, Spain and the Ukraine) and assessed by Trinity
College (Trinity College, 2013). The course lasts some 10 days and includes 36 hours of
input and four hours of assessed teaching practice. Most of the input seems to be guided
observations of experienced teachers through watching video recordings. There is also a
written assignment on teaching materials.
Cambridge’s Teacher Knowledge Test (TKT) has a specialist Young Learner
module but it is aimed at currently practising teachers and is also primary (6-12) focused.
It gives ‘background information’ in the form of four modules, learning and development,
lesson planning, teaching strategies and classroom-based assessment. There is no
teaching practice and the course is assessed by an 80 minute, 80-item multiple-choice test
(Cambridge ESOL TKT-YL Handbook, 2010).
45
International House (IH), the biggest international chain after the British Council,
provides the International House Certificate in Teaching Young Learners and Teenagers
(IHCYLT) in 19 of its centres. Like Cambridge’s Young Learner extension to CELTA, it
assumes some training and experience of teaching adults but none of teaching Young
Learners and the training can be done ‘on the job’ but one needs to be working for
International House to do this course. There are 20 hours of input, covering topics such
as Child Development, Teaching Very Young Learners, Teaching Adolescents and
Materials Design and Selection. There are three hours of assessed teaching practice. The
two written assignments focus on Materials and ‘Self-Reflection’. The observers,
assessors and course tutors are other International House teachers with Young Learner
experience and it is moderated internally with no apparent external validation. The course,
lasting 12 weeks, is a blend of on-line and face-to-face observations of experienced
teachers. It appears to be mandatory in some International House centres.
Other options include one offered by the Norwich Institute for Language
Education (NILE) who define Young Learners as aged 6 to 13 and Very Young Learners
as 3 to 6 and provide bespoke courses tailored to trainees’ interests. There seems to be no
actual classroom practice but the course gives participants “the opportunity to improve
and update [their] spoken and written English” (NILE, 2013), implying they are aimed at
non-native English speaker teachers. Another organization that offers Young Learner
training is Language Link Russia which offers its interns seven input sessions on English
language teaching to Young Learners and one on teaching teenagers (Language Link
Russia, 2012) whilst others, such as English First, claim to provide in-house training for
all its teachers using its own internally devised course materials and teaching methods.
Similarly, Franca’s school (2011), in Brazil, has also established its own Young Learner
English Language teacher training.
Such localized courses may be the way forward, since their content can be tailored
to the specific needs of a centre and its stakeholders. However, such courses may also
need to include some generic features if the skills and knowledge they transmit are to be
transferrable to other contexts. Employers who train teachers primarily to satisfy only
their immediate needs might not be making significant or lasting contributions to the
longer term development of their teachers, but then perhaps that is not their concern.
Cresswell-Turner (2004) derides the Cambridge CELTA as a “Mickey Mouse
teaching certificate” with time wasted on “clownish ‘miming techniques’ and making
idiotic ‘flash-cards’.” (p. 3). There is no room to experiment or find your own voice or
style as a teacher because one simply plays at being a teacher, teaching practice being
46
essentially a role-play with the teacher replicating and demonstrating technique (Brandt,
2006a). Feedback takes the form of a ‘confessional’ where trainees reflect and self-
evaluate by trying to guess what the trainer identified as ‘areas to work on’ (Edwards,
1996). In addition, it promotes one teaching model, rejecting all others, and one passes if
one can assimilate and replicate that model (Richards, 1998). Trainees have “insufficient
opportunity in which to experiment and make mistakes without being judged” (Brandt,
2006a, p. 356). They learn to teach ‘the CELTA way’ (Senior, 2006, p. 41), to play the
game (Cresswell-Turner, 2004), to suspend belief and jump the hoop (Brandt, 2006a) in
what Hobbs (2013, p. 165) calls a ‘boot-camp’ where trainees are drilled in The Method.
The problem, according to Block and Gray (2015), may lie in the relative brevity of the
course. “Quite simply,” they say, “There is not enough time for the… exploration of the
principles underpinning planning choices and the consideration of alternatives” (p. 11).
“EFL teachers who wish to move from other levels to work with young children
will have to re-orientate their teaching expectations” and employ different skills and
techniques, for example “story, dance, role-play and puppet activity, model-making and
so on” (Brumfit, 1991, p. viii). This is not necessarily something that all teachers can do
by themselves. Some may need guidance, even training, and Brewster (1991) writes of a
“pressing and growing need to train teachers in this newly developing field,” suggesting
this training should cover “development of language awareness and awareness of
children’s learning” (p. 9). Twenty years later, Franca (2011) reported that many of the
teachers in her private institution in Brazil felt they “lack[ed] adequate training or
expertise with young learners” and the “necessary teaching skills, understanding,
qualifications and desire to be able to teach young learners” despite the demand (p. 1).
Franca may summarize the situation for many schools across the globe, a need for
English language teaching to Young Learners matched by a lack of appropriately
qualified teachers. Fernandes (2013), also in Brazil, claims that a majority of the 1,864
English teachers working in Brazilian primary schools had neither training nor experience
of working with children and that this impacted on their classroom performance whilst
Beddall (2013) found that teachers who lacked the requisite skills struggled in the
classroom. Both writers, working in Brazil and Japan respectively, suggest that some
formal training is essential for teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners.
The British Council states that people with Qualified Teacher Status (QTS),
Bachelor of Education degrees and Postgraduate Certificates in Education should
“undertake some specialist EFL training” (British Council, 2012) before they start
teaching adults. There is no equivalent suggestion that people with CELTA-type ‘teacher
47
of adults’ status ought to undertake some specialist training before they teach children,
and yet teaching children might be the more challenging discipline. The British Council’s
stated position implies that subject-knowledge matters more than age-related knowledge,
that previous teaching experience, indeed Young Learner-specific training and
qualifications are less important than the kind of techniques learned on the Cambridge
certificate for teaching English to adults.
This may be somewhat misguided considering the number of writers who suggest
that specific knowledge of Young Learners and how they grow, develop and learn is
absolutely essential to someone who teaches them (Brewster, 1991; Brumfit, 1991;
Cameron, 2001; Copland & Garton, 2014; Pinter, 2006). Although 85 British Council
teaching centres provide classes to 130,000 Young Learners under the age of 16 (Ellis,
2013) and are looking to increase this to 150,000 by 2015 (Beddall, 2013), the statement
noted above suggests, as does the direction of Cambridge’s teacher training provision,
that teaching adults is still the industry’s priority and that English Language teacher
education, like the industry itself, is, as Hobbs (2013, p. 164) observes, “slow to respond”
to changes in the market that are redefining that market completely. In addition,
Cambridge Assessment has recently announced the withdrawal, from December 2016, of
the Young Learner extension to the CELTA. The University of York has also announced
the suspension and withdrawal from January 2016 of its MA degree in Teaching English
to Young Learners. The industry may seem, to some, to be going backwards in the area
of Young Learner teacher training.
2.6 Summary
The sources considered in this chapter suggest that within the global English Language
Teaching industry is a vast, unregulated, commercially driven private sector with an
insatiable demand for teachers of English as a Foreign Language whose primary
qualification for teaching is that they speak English fluently. Getting a job in a foreign
country as an English language teacher seems easy and straightforward for globally
mobile native speakers who are willing and able to relocate, especially at short notice.
The qualifying period may be as little as four weeks for the Certificate in English
Language Teaching to Adults, the cost around £1000, and this appears to be optional
anyway. The teacher can fly to their chosen destination, do a week’s training in-house or
just start teaching. In an unregulated, globalized and financially lucrative industry, the
quality of the teachers may matter less than the quantity. Further, the quality of the
preparation and training may be influenced by the commercial demands of privatized,
48
market-led business. The next chapter explores some of the challenges these teachers may
face and examines some of the possibilities for teacher preparation and development
through a review of the principal literature on these subjects.
49
Chapter Three
Literature Review
The previous chapter described and discussed the contextual background of this study. It
explored the position of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners in the
English Language Teaching (ELT) industry and in the private sector. It also described the
community of teachers that serves that private sector. It suggested that English Language
Teaching is a diverse industry with varied and varying requirements in terms of
qualifications and training and it examined some of the training courses currently
available, including the Cambridge CELTA (Certificate in English Language Teaching
to Adults) and its Young Learner extension. Through a consideration of literature
published on these areas, this chapter explores the challenges of moving from training to
teaching in an English Language Teaching context and some specific challenges in
teaching Young Learners, including classroom management, learner motivation and
discipline. The chapter then explores aspects of teacher development, including in-service
training and formal and informal development. Because these were the research
questions, and the reading of the literature was organized around them, this chapter has
been structured in the same way to inform those questions (Ridley, 2012; Thomas, 2009).
It moves from the general to the specific, exploring issues and themes applicable to
teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) more widely before investigating specific
aspects of English language teaching to Young Learners and the preparation of people to
teach that subject to those learners. This is to provide readers with a “map of the terrain”
(Dörnyei, 2007, p. 281), a consideration of the literature which informs this study (Nunan,
1992) and an overview of previous, relevant research. The purpose is to present context
and perspective and to place both the challenges of teaching English as a foreign language
to Young Learners and teacher training and development in a wider educational
continuum. The chapter is therefore organized into three parts, each comprising two
sections. The first, 3.1 and 3.2, discusses the challenges of teaching English as a foreign
language outside the UK and relates to Research Question One. The second, 3.3 and 3.4,
considers key principles and practices of teacher development and relates to Research
Question Two. The third, 3.5 and 3.6, explores how teachers of English to Young
Learners develop their experiences into careers whilst considering the role of reflection
in fostering growth and knowledge and relate to Research Question Three. Key points are
summarized in 3.7.
50
In order to present a fully contextualized review meaningful to both teachers of
English to Young Learners and to academic researchers, the range of sources is wide and
varied. In addition to academic publications and peer-reviewed journals such as ELT
Journal, TESOL Quarterly and Language Teacher, conference papers, articles from
newspapers and magazines, briefing documents, company websites and discussion boards
are also cited because these are sources Young Learner teachers might, for their own
occupational development, access themselves. Furthermore, the use of materials such as
“memos, letters, position papers, examination papers, newspaper clippings… can
illuminate rationale and purpose… background information and understanding of issues”
(Hopkins, 2002, pp. 122-3). This suggests that ‘literature’ can be a varied, all-
encompassing construct which enables both researcher and reader to explore a subject
from many different angles and perspectives and develop an understanding of that subject
that is both full and deep. If the researcher rejects the type of materials listed by Hopkins
and restricts the literature solely to referenced academic papers, for instance, the resultant
knowledge might lack depth due to a narrowing of the range of possible perspectives.
Because “knowledge depends on a plurality of views” (Freeman, 2002, p. 8), on
multiple and diverse perspectives to add depth and enrich knowledge, this research drew
not just from the world of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners and
English Language Teaching but from education in general. Although there are differences
between teaching Young Learners and teaching adults and differences between teaching
English language to speakers of other languages and teaching other subjects, there are
also shared techniques and principles, such as the selection of appropriate learning
activities and materials and the management of learning that all teachers, regardless of
subject and/or level probably need to engage with. Consequently, literature on teacher
development in mainstream education was also considered in this chapter and to inform
this study where it might provide greater insight into or illumination of an issue common
to both English Language Teaching and to mainstream education.
3.1 From training to teaching
3.1.1 Reality shock
Veenman (1984) suggests that “transition from teacher training to the first teaching job
(can) be …[both] dramatic and traumatic” (p. 143) as teachers move from the relative
security of direct supervision to planning for themselves and by themselves, of delivering
lessons unobserved, of setting and evaluating their own performance standards without
the aid or feedback of a trainer, of adapting to a new context, possibly in a different
51
country, almost certainly in a different teaching organization from where the training
occurred, of taking independent and autonomous control of a class, the students in it and
their learning, and of being ultimately both accountable and responsible for student
progress without the security of the training group. They may also need to build
relationships with a diverse range of colleagues, some of whom may be very experienced
or have different views of teaching. This represents a step away from a secure
environment where decisions were made by the trainer into one where the teacher’s
decisions now matter more than they did before. As a trainee, his or her responsibilities
involved delivering four lessons or segments of lessons, sometimes co-planned or co-
taught. Now, as a teacher, they have to deliver a syllabus. Tsui (2003) suggests that some
may feel overwhelmed by this. Uncertain about their levels of expertise and subject
knowledge, especially grammar (Emery, 2012; Garton, et al., 2011; Numrich, 1996;
Senior, 2006), a beginning teacher might even feel he is a “fake, fraud [or] imposter,
bluffing [and] blundering on” (Senior, 2006, p. 51). Coping in this new context through
localized training becomes an urgent concern (Borg, 2003; Hall, 2011; Richards, 1998)
and may involve preparing the new teacher for the specific context they have entered
through induction. Probation, workshops, introductory talks and guided tours of the
teaching centre can constitute induction and support the transition from trainee to teacher.
Impey and Underhill (1994), stressing the importance of induction and
probationary periods to new teachers, suggest a “reduced timetable with a schedule of
classroom observations and planning sessions with an experienced mentor teacher” (p.
66) as one possible approach, the mentor probably being someone who has taught at the
centre before, is familiar with the systems, students, resources and syllabus and is
therefore in a position to contextualize the new teacher’s work as well as to provide
information to help build the new teacher’s occupational knowledge-base. This might not,
however, be fully realizable in a busy commercial school where all the teachers are
working simultaneously. The new teacher may just have to cope. Nevertheless “the
trauma of being thrown unprepared into a full classroom situation is not calculated to
ensure any kind of rational occupational development” (Wallace, 1991, p. 89) since there
will be little time for the teacher to reflect on what they are doing. Consequently
‘beginning’ teachers in their first to third years of teaching (Eraut, 1994; Veenman, 1984)
may tend to focus on mastering the technicalities of teaching such as organizing group-
work and structuring lessons (Senior, 2006) and on classroom performance (Edwards,
1996) as they strive to survive, develop a distinct classroom identity (Numrich, 1996)
beyond learned models and behaviours (Tsui, 2003) and establish relationships.
52
Huberman (1993) indicates that, when talking about their favourite teaching jobs
and experiences, teachers generally recall particular pupils and classes. Given the
apparent centrality of such relationships to teachers, developing, fostering and sustaining
these may in fact be the biggest challenge for teachers, especially those who lack
experience and/or confidence in identifying and addressing potential moments of tension
between learners (ibid., 1993), understanding and satisfying parents’ expectations
(Brewster, et al., 2002; Veenman, 1984), and developing relationships with colleagues.
Further challenges for teachers may involve classroom management. This
includes creating and maintaining an atmosphere within the classroom which supports
learning, identifying, establishing and regulating codes of conduct and behaviour which
do not hinder the learning of others and maintaining discipline, that is taking appropriate
action if a learner breaks a rule or engages in behaviour likely to be detrimental to the
learning of others (Numrich, 1996; Richards & Pennington, 1998; Veenman, 1984).
Additional challenges might include motivating students (Veenman, 1984), assessing
student performance (Richards & Lockhart, 1996; Veenman, 1984), organizing class
work (Veenman, 1984) and identifying, selecting and deploying appropriate teaching
materials or resources, some of which might be unsatisfactory, inadequate or simply
insufficient for teachers to do the kind of job they might want to (Veenman, 1984).
Additional challenges could involve differentiating between the needs of individual
students (Numrich, 1996; Veenman, 1984) and the class as a whole, managing groups
and keeping them focused on the tasks (Richards & Lockhart, 1996), completing the
syllabus and course-book within the allotted time (Richards & Pennington, 1998), giving
instructions (Numrich, 1996), selecting and sequencing activities (Richards & Lockhart,
1996) to maximise learning opportunities, and grading language (Richards & Lockhart,
1996) so what the teacher says is accessible. Any or all of these might ‘overwhelm’
beginning teachers (Tsui, 2003) as they “struggle for control and the students’ attention”
(Bailey, 1997, pp. 3-4) and try to reconcile teaching practice with teaching reality
(Richards & Pennington, 1998).
Situational challenges such as differing, unfamiliar or incomprehensible
administrative and organizational practices may collide with personal expectations
(Veenman, 1984) and can determine whether a teacher will fulfil their contract or leave
prematurely. For example, some teachers living in a foreign country can become
frustrated with systems that they do not understand and occasionally such frustrations
reach a point where some teachers walk away from a job. It seems critical, therefore, to
prepare teachers for the realities of life as a globally mobile, internationally travelling
53
English Language teacher, managing their expectations and their entry to the industry
itself, the culture of teaching English as a foreign language and the culture of the host
country, “especially [those] who perhaps have not worked abroad before” (Talking Shop,
1989, p. 128), and to prepare them for the various challenges they may face.
Veenman (1984) identifies four basic needs for teachers:
respect (from learners, colleagues, parents, the wider community);
liking (of the learners by the teacher);
belonging (to the community within the teaching centre) and
a sense of competence (that the teacher feels s/he is doing a ‘good’ job and that
learners are making progress).
Dörnyei (2001) suggests these needs can be damaged by context or circumstance such as
a difficult class, getting into an argument with a learner or receiving a complaint from a
parent. Other issues might include a perceived lack of career structure, inadequate
training, few or no opportunities for study leave, a high attrition rate creating an unstable
staffroom with frequently changing faces, low motivation through boredom, staleness or
frequent repetition of the same courses and materials and lack of empowerment due to an
inability to change structures, frameworks or systems established by senior managers or
owners. Furthermore, class size, school culture, dissatisfaction with materials/courses,
feeling that it is ‘not a proper job’ and limited potential for intellectual development
(Dörnyei, 2001; Huberman, 1993; Johnston, 1983; Pennington, 1995) can also affect
teacher morale and motivation. Finally, the biggest challenge may be “maintaining
commitment, enthusiasm and self-confidence amidst the continuing turbulence of
classroom and school life” (Day, 1999, p. 4). “Teaching,” notes Huberman (1993), “Is a
lottery, heavily dependent on the pupils one draws from one year to the next” (p. 252)
and a ‘bad’ class of disruptive, disinterested or disengaged students can damage a
teacher’s motivation and foster feelings of fear, anxiety, loneliness, helplessness and
meaninglessness (Day, 1999).
Maintaining personal and occupational motivation may represent a major
challenge for some teachers. Boredom with repeatedly teaching the same language items,
lack of autonomy, feeling trapped in someone else’s timetable, disagreements with
colleagues and the institution (Dörnyei, 2001) may also be debilitating, particularly for a
teacher recruited in their home country, whether it is the United Kingdom, the United
States, Spain, Poland or anywhere else, working alone in a foreign country without an
immediate or obvious support network such as family or friends. It is possible that the
only people such a teacher knows in such a situation are other teachers. This means much
54
of the conversation in their leisure time might be work-related because it is the common
element shared by all the members of the group. Talking about work can be a release for
work-related stress but, if teachers are unhappy or unsettled, negative feelings can be
strengthened or even exaggerated through such discussion thus deepening the sense of
isolation and loneliness.
Hettiarachchi (2010) suggests that teacher motivation includes “job satisfaction,
commitment, morale, desire, effort, enjoyment… and autonomy” (p. 16) or emotional
satisfaction whilst Williams and Burden (1997) suggest teacher motivation includes
interest, curiosity and desire to achieve a goal, or mental stimulation. Dörnyei (2001)
suggests that teacher motivation “is very closely linked” with situational context (p. 156).
Being happy, fulfilled and intellectually stimulated at work seems a key element of
teacher motivation, but, says Dörnyei (ibid.), this motivation can be abused, exploited,
undermined or destroyed by contextual realities so, as Praver and Baldwin (2008) suggest,
the support of the institution can be influential as a motivating force. In other words,
employers need to be aware of factors underlying teacher motivation such as those given
above and try to foster, nurture and develop them. Feeling obliged to teach Young
Learners as a timetable filler or to meet an institutional need, despite inadequate training
or a lack of interest, may be one such demotivating element especially if lessons
consisting mainly of games and songs present limited intellectual challenge or stimulation
for teachers wishing to focus on elements of the language system (Veenman, 1984). These
aspects of teaching have not been explicitly or extensively explored in the context of
teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners. This thesis attempts, in
Chapters Five and Six, to offer some insights how practitioners behave in such situations.
3.1.2 Culture shock
For some teachers of English as a foreign language, beginning a new job can coincide
with moving to a new country. This presents challenges such as finding accommodation,
making friends and adjusting to a new culture and language (McKay, 1992; Veenman,
1984). They may also need to address some potential suspicion within their institution of
“bouncy young native speakers… with introductory language teaching qualifications and
breezy personalities” on their way to the beach (Senior, 2006, p. 58), especially if the
local staff have studied for many years to acquire the necessary language skills as well as
the appropriate degrees, diplomas and certificates.
Because classrooms operate within a wider institutional and cultural context
“which to a large extent determines not only what it is to be learned but also how it is to
55
be learned” (McKay, 1992, p. 47), the teacher may encounter problems with activities as
seemingly simple as portraying a dog as a family pet or asking children to draw their
parents (ibid., 1992), taboo issues in some cultures. There may also be challenges with
classroom behaviour. For instance, in some cultures, silence is “considered the best
response when someone is not certain of the correct reply” (ibid., p. 65) but an English
language teacher from a different culture may find such silence uncomfortable because
they have been trained in the ‘communicative approach’ which holds that language
teaching is teaching communication (Howatt, 2004) and specifically oral communication.
Students may have a shared cultural expectation about what should happen in a classroom
(McKay, 1992). They may be more concerned about passing written examinations than
participating in speaking games or role-plays (Garton, et al., 2011). They may believe the
teacher knows best and is there to tell them the answers rather than elicit them. Such
attitudes may conflict with the teacher’s training and require adjustment or compromise
in everything, from how one teaches to how one dresses (McKay, 1992). Indeed, many
classroom management issues may actually stem from a cultural ‘clash of ideologies’,
where the teacher’s approach and methodology conflicts with student, parent or
institutional expectations.
There may, in addition, be challenges to teacher’s personal beliefs (Borg, 2003;
Crookes, 2009; Day, 1999; Holliday, 2005; Richards, 1998; Tsui, 2003). Whatever a
teacher believes about the world, or the moral, ethical and social framework within which
they operate, may be challenged by different moral, ethical and political values held by
the learners or the wider society in which the teacher has come to live. Racist, sexist or
homophobic attitudes, which the teacher finds unacceptable, may be commonplace in the
host-culture, and expressed in the classroom.
Brown (1986) describes the teacher suffering from culture shock as “view[ing]
his new world out of resentment and alternat[ing] between being angry at others for not
understanding and being filled with self-pity” (p. 35). He identifies four stages:
1. Excitement over the novelty of the new culture;
2. Insecurity in the culture, where the individual seeks out fellow countrymen for
support and complains about the locals;
3. Acceptance that ‘they do things differently here’ (though not as well as at home);
4. Assimilation or adaptation (or alienation).
In everyday life, culture shock might involve issues with local food and shopping
customs, coping with the public transport system or living without automated cash
dispensers (McKay, 1992). Some teachers may find issues such as poverty, sanitation,
56
health and safety or child labour practices as difficult to accept and may struggle with
unfamiliar practices. Culture shock may be a very real threat to teacher motivation.
These stages of culture shock may, however, apply as equally to new institutions
and new jobs as they do to new countries. If culture is the “heritage of a people” and the
biography of a nation including its “attitudes, customs, daily activities, ways of thinking,
values, frames of reference,” geography, history, art, music, literature and science
(Valette, 1986, p. 179), and the definition is extended to cover schools, colleges and
universities, indeed any community or organization, every beginning teacher, indeed
every teacher, might face possible culture shock with each job and change of context as
they adjust to the attitudes and traditions that shape each one. Managing this particular
challenge may be an under-researched element of supporting teacher development.
3.2 From teaching adults to teaching young learners
The most challenging aspect of teaching English as a foreign language to young learners
might simply be knowing how to do it, and this might require some awareness of how
children learn languages. Briefly, oral communication in a first language might begin
between birth and eight or nine months with ‘babbling’ (Brewster, Ellis & Girard, 2002;
Brown, 2000; Lightbown & Spada, 1999) which develops into words at around one year
old as children seem to begin to identify objects (Vygotsky, 1978). Between the ages of
eighteen months and two years, children appear to acquire a vocabulary of around fifty
words and combine them into chunks so that, by ages three to four, they “can ask
questions, give commands, report real events and create stories” (Lightbown & Spada,
1999, p. 2), becoming “generators of non-stop chattering and incessant conversation”
(Brown, 2000, p. 21). This is supported by a vocabulary of several hundred words and a
recognizable grammar system. Reading and writing skills develop between six and twelve
years. By adolescence, young learners are able to use “compound-complex, cognitively
precise, socio-culturally appropriate sentences” (ibid., p. 22). How this first language
develops remains largely unclear but it could be a combination of
behaviourism, or “imitation, practice, feedback and habit formation” (Lightbown
& Spada, 1999, p. 9), copying sounds and words and repeating them until they
become a habit;
biological programming involving a ‘language acquisition device’ (or LAD) in
the brain which contains “all… the principles… universal to all human languages”
(ibid., p.16) and a genetic predisposition to discover “a deep and abstract theory -
a generative grammar of his language” (Chomsky, in Donaldson, 1978, p. 35);
57
interaction with others, particularly adults, who might tell stories or sing songs
with their children, using simpler language, modifying speech patterns, repeating
and recycling vocabulary (Brewster, et al., 2002). This interaction might provide
the comprehensible input which Krashen believes is “the essential ingredient
for… language acquisition” (1985, p. 4) whilst Vygotsky “assumes that all
cognitive development, including language development, arises as a result of
social interactions” (in Lightbown & Spada, 1999, p. 44).
Aitchison (1994) claims that “at each age, a child is tuned into some particular aspect of
language” (p. 7), very young children to sounds, 3 to 11s to structure and semantics,
adolescents to lexis, whilst teenagers, with a vocabulary of around 20,000 words, are able
to identify and use existing language patterns to create new ones. These differences may
have significant implications for the way English language teachers approach their classes
since how one believes a child learns a language might influence the way one teaches it.
Some aspects of first language acquisition might also be common to elements of
second language learning, for instance the imitation of sounds and the identification of
patterns in the target language and their application to new contexts (Aitchison, 1994;
Lightbown & Spada, 1999). Tough (1991) and Brown (2000) suggest that children use
rules and patterns from their first language to guide their construction of a second
language, using new input to test and review existing knowledge and amend it in the light
of those tests. Hughes (2001) considers that children learn best “when they have the
guidance, learning environment, intellectual and emotional support created by an adult or
mentor” (p. 17). However, if this last point is true, the adult, mentor or teacher perhaps
needs to be aware of how and what this support should involve.
“Teachers,” write Copland and Garton (2012), “play a critical role in creating an
environment in which children feel happy trying out their English skills” (p. 4). Doing
this presents teachers with another set of challenges. Moon (2000) suggests these include
managing classroom discipline and issues of self-esteem in addition to practical matters
such as finding appropriate materials, selecting and sequencing appropriate activities,
planning, identifying suitable topics and resources and assessing the learning outcomes.
Other issues might include teaching grammar (Garton, et al., 2011), managing large
classes (Emery, 2012) and devising appropriate and engaging learning activities for
teenagers (Lindstromberg, 2004). In addition new language may need contextualizing
differently for children (Brewster, et al., 2002; Hughes, 2001; Pinter, 2006), embedding
and exemplifying in and through accessible, identifiable, meaningful and age-appropriate
experiences such as going to school or playing with toys that would be less appropriate
58
for teaching new language to adults. Furthermore, teachers may need to consider
motivating learners, establishing routines, building self-esteem, being fair, getting
attention, giving praise, controlling noise levels, dealing with mixed ability groups and
balancing lesson structure (Pinter, 2006) and creating a stimulating language learning
environment (Hughes, 2001) in ways that differ from stimulating groups of adults.
Brewster (1991) suggests Young Learners can have short concentration spans and
may be easily distracted. They can find listening difficult “even in the mother tongue”
(Slaven & Slaven, 1991, p. 50). They might not, aged 5 or 6, be able to read or write in
any language (Machura, 1991) let alone English. They are still learning their own first
language (Brewster, et al., 2002; Pinter, 2006). They “learn more slowly and forget things
quickly [and are] self-oriented and preoccupied with their own world” (Brewster, et al.,
2002, pp. 27-28). They may be uncooperative, get frustrated quickly and need security in
routine (ibid.). Furthermore “younger children tend to be more enthusiastic while older
children (11-12 upwards) often become less interested, embarrassed… or even hostile”
(Moon, 2000, p. 17) although, of course, attitudes can change and older children can be
as enthusiastic as anyone else. In addition, decentred thinking, where the child has the
capacity to acknowledge the needs of others, may not begin to emerge until the age of
seven or eight (Vygotsky, 1986) which may make group or pair-work difficult.
Young Learners can also make demands on teachers that adults might not. For
instance, they may be more temperamentally volatile than adults (Brewster, et al., 2002),
reacting to events more emotionally and being less able to detach personal feelings from
a situation. Gorham (1985) suggests that, consequently, “teachers… tend to provide more
emotional support to [YLs] through more use of praise and encouragement and more
acceptance of student feelings” (p. 203) than with adults. This may be more challenging
when the teacher does not share or know the culture of the children with whom they are
working. This researcher, for example, did not understand why one young learner in
Jordan got upset when asked to draw a picture of his family. The researcher did not know
this was a cultural taboo in that individual’s country of origin (Saudi Arabia). A lack of
cultural awareness can create problems of trust and respect within the teacher-learner
relationship that might impact negatively on learning. Furthermore, in addition to
managing the cultural aspects of the new classroom, some teachers may be given classes
containing children with disabilities or learning difficulties (Garton, et al., 2011). Without
some kind of knowledge or training in how to work with special educational needs, this
challenge could become insurmountable, demotivating and demoralizing, stressful for the
young learner and the teacher alike.
59
Beder and Darkenwald (1982) suggested a number of perceived differences
between teaching adults and teaching Young Learners, including the notion that adults
may be “more intellectually curious, more concerned with practical
applications/implications of learning, more motivated to learn, less confident in their
ability to learn, more willing to take responsibility for their learning [and]… more willing
to work hard at [it]” than Young Learners (p. 145). They indicate that these differences
may affect the teacher’s approach in the classroom, suggesting they make “greater use of
group discussion, spend less time on discipline, vary their techniques more and spend less
time giving directions” (ibid.). It appears that teachers may need to make adjustments to
both expectations and approaches, and be prepared to be flexible, especially since these
differences may be intensified if the children are very young.
Vassiliou (2014), identifying differences between Young Learners and Very
Young Learners (aged 2 to 6), suggested Very Young Learners were “extremely
emotional” with very short attention-spans and, losing interest quickly, abandoned
activities at the first difficulty. She noted that, because of their limited motor-skills, tasks
like cutting out and drawing took longer than with her older students. This affected her
planning and limited what she could achieve in a 40 minute lesson with 23 children. She
suggested Very Young Learners had less world knowledge which meant topics popular
with older children like animals and space did not work because they knew nothing about
them.
At the other end of the Young Learner age-spectrum, teenagers can be perceived
as even more challenging (Lewis, 2007). Puchta and Schratz (1983) wonder why it can
sometimes be “hard to achieve a good learning atmosphere among teenagers in schools…
[and] why… liveliness, humour and flashes of inspiration [are] much more common in
groups of adults than in groups of young people” (p. 1). The physical and emotional
changes that take place in adolescence may affect learning, attitude, motivation and
behaviour, “changes in self-concept… and radical alterations in all social relationships”
(Coleman, 1994, p. 57). Additionally “teenagers… have a low awareness of the social
skills basic to co-operative interaction” (Puchta & Schratz, 1983, p. 1). Some teachers
may feel apprehensive about engaging with “the inextricable chaos of adolescent
thought” (Piaget, 1926, p. 47) as these YLs work through issues of identity, social
relationships and increasingly autonomous responsibility. Teenagers “can be quite
emotional. Everything is so momentous and all-consuming” (Lewis, 2007, p. 5) in a way
that may not be true for adults, potentially placing strain on a teacher’s empathy and
patience.
60
A further challenge may manifest itself when some Young Learners lack clear or
immediate needs, goals or obvious uses for the language they are studying (Brewster, et
al., 2002; Graves, 1996; Moon, 2000; Puchta & Schratz, 1983). This may become
especially acute if they have a low level of proficiency (Lindstromberg, 2004). Such
students may well question why they are still attending classes in which they make little
progress. In addition, some students may be learning English because someone else (a
parent) is making them do so, and consequently their motivation might become an issue
with possible resistance to the imposition of lessons (Bourne, 1996) by others in their free
time.
Another potential issue lies in the possibility that parents and policymakers may
hold beliefs about teaching and learning (Hall, 2011) which might conflict with those of
the teacher. These could include matters such as drilling, error correction, group work or
teacher talking time (TTT), especially when “the teacher’s talk [might] provide the main
or only form of language input for children” (Moon, 2000, p. 62) or, as Copland and
Garton (2012) suggest, the teacher is the only source or model. Parents, teachers,
managers, possibly students themselves might, in addition, view English lessons that
revolve around songs, games, videos and colouring tasks as play rather than ‘learning’
(Rixon, 1992). Some, when they see workbooks full of colouring activities and lessons
full of games may echo Rogers’ sentiment that “a lot of English is being taught and
textbook writers (and publishers) are making money out of English teaching [but] one
wonders how much English is actually being learnt” (1982, p. 148). The challenge,
perhaps, is how to respect local views and traditions whilst maintaining occupational
integrity. Ellis (2013) suggests the relationship between parent and teacher could be vital
for the success of the child. This implies that teachers need to know how and when to
communicate with parents as well as what to tell them and Ellis suggests teachers
probably need training “to develop the interpersonal and communication skills needed to
liaise with parents” (2013, p. 3). Such training is not currently included in either the
Cambridge CELTA or the Young Learner extension, or the Trinity College Certificate,
although it might be given in local, in-service contexts. Furthermore there is currently
little published research into the parent-teacher relationship or how different
organizations support their teachers (and parents) in this critical element of Young
Learner language learning and development. It could be an area for useful future study.
Some adult-trained teachers of Young Learners may need to rethink their
approach to lesson planning altogether (Hughes, 2001; Moon, 2005; Vassiliou, 2014;
Williams, 1991) if they are to do what Copland and Garton (2012) suggest and create an
61
appropriate environment in which children can experiment and take risks. Cameron
(2003) suggests moving away from a model that provides a framework for teaching
English to adults to something more appropriate to teaching English to children. The
(adult) model promoted in Cambridge and Trinity training courses and in adult course-
books comprises Four Skills (Writing, Reading, Listening and Speaking) and Four
Systems (Grammar, Lexis, Discourse and Phonology). An alternative model for teaching
English to Young Learners might integrate these skills and systems into a holistic, ‘whole
language’ approach rather than following a reductionist, discrete-item one. This might be
built upon games, stories, songs, rhymes, chants, arts and crafts such as drawing, puppetry
and mask-making, and embedded in age-appropriate learning contexts underpinned by
age-appropriate tasks and objectives. Such models appear in a number of published
Young Learner course-books, for example Happy Street (Maidment & Roberts, 2000)
which uses cartoon stories, chants and colouring activities and are brightly coloured,
attractive publications. Happy Street also has a wealth of supporting resources including
flashcards, audio CDs, a website and posters, giving the teacher a range of activity choices
and materials.
Some teachers, however, may not have access to such course-books or possess the
knowledge to construct an integrated language model with age-appropriate activities and
objectives. In addition, games, songs and chants do not appeal to everyone, teacher or
learner, and those teachers whose goals are driven primarily by language outcomes may
become disillusioned when asked to pursue different goals (Rixon, 1992). Further, Ellis’
suggestion that teachers need to provide “learning experiences that are age and context-
appropriate, relevant [and] which build confidence and self-esteem” (2013, p. 2) cannot
be met if the teachers do not know how to do this.
A further issue arises with age-group specialization, where teachers may be
expected to work with a diverse age-range such as 6 to 12 or 12 to 16 rather than one age-
group only, such as 7 year olds. Generally, secondary school teachers tend to be subject-
focused specialists who teach one subject across the 11 to 16 age-range whilst primary
teachers tend to be child-focused all-rounders (Rixon, 1992) who teach one age-group,
such as 8 year olds, everything, although this may not always be true. A private language
centre might expect its teachers to do both even though, as Donaldson (1978) and Piaget
(1926) show, 7 year olds are different from 13 years olds in terms of communicative
capability and cognitive, social and self-awareness and most state-school systems
consequently distinguish between them. In order to create viable classes, or in response
to parental pressure, small commercial language centres may not be able to stratify so
62
clearly. This researcher had, in one centre, a class ranging in age from 5 to 11 inclusive
and 11, 12 and 13 year olds in classes of adults. Teaching such mixed-age groups presents
additional challenges, of trying to integrate children and adults, of balancing topics,
interests, materials and learning activities, of trying to meet as many needs as possible,
whilst understanding and accommodating the school’s operational pressures.
Fernandes (2013, p. 37) claims that, in Brazil, a large number of teachers “lacked
experience in teaching young learners.” The teachers’ challenges included primary level
teaching generally, early language learning, managing large classes and motivating
students to use English. Beddall (2013) suggests Young Learner teachers need an
understanding of the theories of child language learning, including literacy development
in both the first language (L1) and a second or foreign language (L2), in order to inform
their choices of context-appropriate methodology that will support child language
learning and development. Neither the Cambridge nor the Trinity College certificates
provide teachers with any of this knowledge. Nor does Cambridge’s Young Learner
extension, preferring instead to concentrate on classroom-based teaching practice.
Moreover, Beddall suggests Young Learner teachers need “independence and resilience,
flexibility and liking children” (ibid., pp. 8-9) and Franca (2011) thinks it important that
teachers enjoy being with children. However, not all teachers do like children, nor do they
enjoy being with them.
According to Brewster, et al. (2002), “the challenge for all [YL] teachers of
English is to have the knowledge, skills and sensitivities of a teacher of children and of a
teacher of language and to be able to balance and combine the two successfully” (p. 269,
researcher’s italics) whilst Holderness (1991) says “it is vital to retain as the focus of our
teaching a clear view of how younger children learn best” (p. 32). However, some
teachers may not know how children learn best. Instead, “lacking in formal preparation
and training, [we hope] that [our] enthusiasm and determination will stand [us] in good
stead to meet the challenge of working with young learners” (Machura, 1991, p. 68). This
research investigates how far this strategy works.
The biggest challenge facing teachers of English as a foreign language to Young
Learners seems to be managing the whole business of their students’ language learning
whilst managing their own personal and occupational culture shock, in terms of a new
country, new school, new class or the whole activity of teaching English to Young
Learners itself. There seems little published research on how teachers manage these
aspects of their occupational lives and little in their training to support them when things
go wrong. There appears to be a ‘training gap’ in some private language centre Young
63
Learner English Language Teaching and perhaps that training gap is a consequence of a
research gap. This study aims to investigate both through asking teachers how they
perceive these challenges and how they meet them and this is Research Question One,
namely: what challenges face teachers of English as a foreign language to Young
Learners in private language schools in international contexts?
3.3 Principles of teacher development
For teachers to develop into informed practitioners, they need to construct a knowledge-
base that will enable them to grow as teachers, with principles, beliefs and values
underpinning a repertoire of practical skills. These might include organizing and staging
activities so they run efficiently, timing tasks and activities and anticipating potential
problems with new language input. Without this knowledge-base, “you’re just left with
random techniques” (Kennedy, 1989, p. 130). Teachers, perhaps, need to be able to select
and connect the appropriate technique for the context based on the context, and this means
making informed, principled choices.
Eraut (1994) writes that “the support of a system of continuing professional
education… is essential for sustaining and improving the quality of professional work”
(p. 116). It may also contribute to maintaining occupational interest, engagement and
motivation (Enever, 2011) in what can be “a highly stressful and intellectually numbing
process in which under-skilled practitioners try to survive against the odds” (Dörnyei,
2001, p. 169), especially “after ten years or more in the field with low pay and poor
conditions, …temporary or part-time contracts, …low morale, low self-esteem and a
sense of frustration and isolation” (Bolitho, 1988, in Head & Taylor, 1997, pp. 2-4).
Teachers may engage with development because they think it will enhance their
employability. It can also stop them getting bored once the repetitious annual cycle has
been assimilated (Hargreaves, 1994) into an automatic routine. “Maintaining the interest,
creativity and enthusiasm of experienced teachers... is one of the challenges faced by
programme coordinators, school principals and teacher educators” (Richards & Farrell,
2005, p. vii) and the presence of “development processes, opportunities for continuing
independent learning… (and) freedom to experiment” can be powerfully motivating
(Praver & Baldwin, 2008, p. 1).
If training focuses on practical skills (Ferguson & Donno, 2003), development
enhances knowledge (Richards & Farrell, 2005), the building of a personal practical
knowledge-base (Golombek, 1998) which consists of practical knowledge, theoretical
knowledge, subject knowledge, situational or contextual knowledge, experiential
64
knowledge and personal, self-knowledge (Bailey, 1997; Brewster, et al., 2002; Eraut,
1994; Golombek, 1998; Mann, 2005; Tsui, 2003). These domains may be constructed
individually by each individual, are unique to that individual and consequently truly
meaningful only to that individual (Vygotsky, 1978). “Knowledge shapes practice but [is]
also shaped by practice” (Tsui, 2003, p. 46). The two, as Tsui indicates, seem intimately
linked and both, perhaps, contribute to a teacher’s evolution.
Wallace (1991) distinguishes between training as “presented and managed by
others” and development as “something that can be done only by and for oneself” (p. 3),
indicating the personalized nature of the latter. Ur (1998) suggests training “refers to the
preparation of teachers for professional practice through formal courses” with a course
syllabus and structure, whilst development “is learning carried out by practitioners
already working in the classroom” where the teachers themselves “decide what and how
they want to learn” (p. 21). Again, teacher development seems to centre on individual
needs and priorities.
For Head and Taylor (1997) “development means change and growth…
complementary to training and…motivated by teachers’ own questioning of who they are
and what they do rather than by any external training agenda” (p. 1). However, this
presupposes teachers are questioning who they are. They may not be (Ferguson & Donno,
2003; Senior, 2006; Wallace, 1991). Richards and Farrell (2005) also suggest that
teachers are interested in professional development, in “updating their professional
knowledge” (p. ix) and Underhill, in Head and Taylor (1997), states that “teachers all
around the world are eager to learn about teacher development and ready to take on more
responsibility for their own professional growth” (p. viii). Again, these assumptions may
not be true. The teacher-tourist may not have an interest in updating their knowledge, nor
even a need to. Equally, they may not want to engage with development unless there is
some material incentive or benefit for them (Mann, 2005). Doing so to improve teaching
performance may not be sufficiently motivating. For example, not all teachers do the
Cambridge Diploma or attend in-service training and some writers (Emery, 2012;
Ferguson & Donno, 2003; Senior, 2006) suggest that initial training is all many teachers
do. Nonetheless, the theory of a personal knowledge-base, even for these teachers, may
remain valuable and the notion that this knowledge-base evolves, grows and develops
with every day a teacher engages with the job remains valid because each day can bring
different challenges, frustrations and rewards. Teachers, after all, work with people, in all
their complexity. Potential personal and occupational growth may exist in each encounter.
This growth may be “sometimes natural and evolutionary, sometimes opportunistic and
65
sometimes the result of planning” (Day, 1999, p. 1) and sometimes in spite of the teacher
himself, for growth may be an unconscious process that happens through experience,
reflection on experience and greater awareness of other possibilities, from exposure to
other ideas rather than from conscious choices. Teacher development might take place
through a form of osmosis, with teachers absorbing new ideas, information and
knowledge unconsciously from the surrounding environment, whether it is the classroom,
the staff room, a conference or a text-book.
Teacher development is “voluntary, bottom-up, inclusive of personal and moral
dimensions” (Mann, 2005, pp. 104-5), fostering a greater “understanding of teaching…
[and]… general growth” (Richards & Farrell, 2005, p. 4), a deeper understanding of what
teachers are doing (Tsui, 2003), “a deeper conceptualization of teaching” (Richards &
Lockhart, 1996, p. 89) and a recognition of the influence of contextual realities on practice
(Borg, 2003). It is a personalized (Head & Taylor, 1997), individualized, flexible, teacher-
directed process (Emery, 2012) aimed at growing the whole person. “Centred on personal
awareness… [it] builds on the past, …draws on the present …and is self-reflective” (Head
& Taylor, 1997, p. 1), where “reflection is forward-looking as well as retrospective”
(Hughes & Williams, 1998). It is also about developing a set of beliefs and values as an
independent, autonomous teacher (Crookes, 2009; Richards, 1998) whose decision-
making is principled, who understands “why certain things make sense” (Graves, 1996,
p. 2) and who has moved from the preoccupation with teacher performance observed in
new teachers to an interest in student learning, from the micro-concerns of teaching, of
lesson plans, timing and materials, to macro-concerns of learning, of student needs,
lesson impact and learning outcomes (Senior, 2006).
Teachers may need “to become more self-aware with regard to their beliefs and
the ways in which they make sense of the world” (Williams & Burden, 1997, p. 53),
especially learning and teaching, because “your beliefs about how children learn
languages will strongly influence how you teach them” (Brewster, et al., 2002, p. 26). For
example, whether one sees children as “resisters, receptacles, partners [or] explorers”
(Meighan & Meighan, 1990, cited in Brown & Rodgers, 2002, p. 153) may well influence
how one approaches them. If a teacher sees children as ‘receptacles’, for instance, as
empty vessels to be filled with knowledge, they may perhaps adopt a more teacher-led,
didactic approach. If a teacher sees children as ‘explorers’ who learn from experimenting
with language, making and correcting mistakes, they might adopt an approach that
encourages risk-taking, a more inductive, possibly more autonomous student-led
learning. If the teacher sees children as ‘partners’ in learning, they could provide
66
opportunities for pair-work or group-work where children can learn from and support
each other. If the teacher sees children as ‘resisters’ who do not really want to learn
English, they may focus on motivational strategies, or provide plenty of games or play-
based activities to make the English lesson feel ‘lighter’.
Some teachers may “act in the light of their own beliefs, attitudes and perceptions”
(Williams & Burden, 1997, p. 95), perhaps evolving from personal, individual experience
(Golombek, 1998), which helps them relate and reframe their knowledge to suit new
contexts, situations and challenges (Tsui, 2003). They might become more flexible,
drawing more on instinct and less on training to make decisions (Borg, 2003) whilst
developing awareness of “how one technique might be used in different contexts for
different purposes” (Edwards, 1996, p. 104). They may also come to recognize the
limitations of some techniques, understanding that “you can only do some things with
some classes” (Senior, 2006, p. 151) and why this is so, and also why some things are
effective (Hughes & Williams, 1998), and others are not. This is development through
experience, where experience comprises a set of events, occurrences and happenings
rather than length of service; a teacher might have “ten years’ experience or one year
experienced ten times” (Bowen & Marks, 1994, p. 168), repeating the same teaching
patterns and behaviours unchanged and unchanging, without risk or reflection.
Some teachers place a high value on their experience. It can shape their beliefs
about and understanding of teaching and learning (Borg, 2003) but it can also limit
understanding since experience is perceived and interpreted through the filter of an
individual’s cognitive framework and personal belief system (Eraut, 1994). This filter
may distort the supposed truth of experience and an “over-reliance on (personal)
experience… rather than drawing on experts’ opinions, theories or external sources of
knowledge” (Richards & Lockhart, 1996, p. 3) could actually limit development if a
teacher’s individual experience is neither empirically nor generalizably true. Freeman
(2002) writes of ‘the insulation of experience’, suggesting that experience alone and the
dismissal of theory and research can lead to a refusal to engage with change. In addition,
experience is only as good as the context in which it is gained and this might render it
parochially untransferrable (Hargreaves & Goodson, 1996). In other words, what appears
true in one context may not appear so in another.
67
3.4 Teacher development in practice
Teacher development in practice seems to be a blend of institutionally planned activities,
self-initiated activities such as choosing to read a book or watching a webinar, here termed
‘do-it-yourself’ development, and informal, opportunistic moments where other teachers
pass on ideas and suggestions and yet there is a “growing feeling that all of us as language
teaching professionals can, and even must, take on the responsibility for our own
development” (Wallace, 1991, p. 2) if it is to be of personal and lasting value. Others
writers think it the responsibility of employers, schools and governments to support
teacher development (Day, 1999). This section considers some possible types of formal
and informal teacher development, including both employer- and employee-driven,
which relate to Research Question Two, namely: what opportunities for training and
occupational development are available to teachers of English as a foreign language to
young learners in international contexts?
3.4.1 Institutionally organized teacher development
“Opportunities for in-service training are crucial to the long-term development of teachers
as well as for the long-term success of the programs in which they work” (Richards &
Farrell, 2005, p. 1), perhaps because teaching seems to be constantly evolving and both
schools and teachers need to be aware of this evolution if what they teach is to be relevant
and applicable in the outside world. This may be particularly true in the competitive
commercial sector where a language centre’s market position and business success may
depend upon using the most recent publications and most modern methods. However,
given that for some teachers their choice of employer, job, country or even career might
be arbitrary (Johnston, 1997), that some may not be in-service long enough for employers
to benefit from this investment (Ferguson & Donno, 2003) and that some might not be
interested, these expectations could be both unfair and unrealistic. Consequently, “once
in the… system, teachers are either seldom offered (TD) opportunities or have difficulties
in finding time to attend courses while being fully engaged with… teaching activities”
(Enever, 2011, p. 72). As a result, much institutionally organized teacher development
needs to be “based in or around the workplace” (Eraut, 1994, p. 116) and in or around the
working day.
One such form of workplace-based development is In-Service Education and
Training (INSET). This is a “planned event, series of events or extended programmes of
accredited or non-accredited learning” in the workplace (Day, 1999, p. 131) and can range
from one hour sessions to structured five-day programmes. For some, In-service
68
Education and Training may take the form of a workshop in which “experienced
colleagues share their ideas” (Senior, 2006, p. 62) but these can be “hit or miss affairs…
sometimes thrown together without a great deal of preliminary thought or planning”
(Richards & Farrell, 2005, p. 23) if they are delivered, for example, by a busy teacher
who is not given the time to plan properly, or if participants are not interested in the topic,
but the centre manager insists it is covered.
INSET workshops can be perceived as an imposition if they are held in a lunch-
break or at the end of a working day, or if attendance is compulsory and not recompensed
either financially or by time off in lieu. In-service training workshops, like staff meetings,
can provoke resentment and resistance. Worse, they can fail completely if the trainer is
poor, under-qualified, makes teachers feel “guilty and inadequate” (Tomlinson, 1988, p.
1) or lacks real knowledge of the subject. This may be true, for example, in a small school
with an inexperienced staff where the trainer is still himself a relative beginner. As
Hughes and Williams indicate “Many ELT trainers… have not received formal training
as trainers” (1998, p. 1). Consequently, for some teachers, in-service training, especially
in the form of workshops, may offer something of questionable quality.
“Experienced teachers tend to be independent-minded and articulate… [and may
be]… somewhat sceptical… [about] yet another workshop” (Senior, 2006, p. 63),
particularly if it is perceived as irrelevant, patronizing or, worse, unnecessary. It seems
“a pre-requisite for successful school-based INSET [that] the ideas the teachers are
working with have sufficient merit… to be worth pursuing” (Eraut, 1994, p. 35). In other
words, teachers must be convinced that a training workshop is worthwhile if it is to
succeed. There may be few things more frustrating for busy teachers than having to
surrender time at the end of the working week for a lecture on a subject of no obvious
value. Equally, an effective and stimulating workshop can be negated by contextual
constraints and the inability of teachers to implement new ideas (Tomlinson, 1988, p. 2).
Such frustrations may contribute to a rejection of the ideas as inappropriate for the context
(Borg, 2003; Lamb, 1995; Tomlinson, 1988), even if they are not, and a resistance to
change can develop, as shown by both Lamb (1995) and Tomlinson (1988) in follow-up
surveys of teacher participants returning home after attending an in-service training
workshop.
In addition, whilst teacher development can be an “extended, often lifelong
process” (Dörnyei, 2001, p. 158), teaching English as a foreign language and teaching
English to Young Learners might not be extended, lifelong careers. In an occupation
based on short-term contracts (Senior, 2006), with low pay, low status, a heavy workload
69
and lack of clear career opportunities (Praver & Baldwin, 2008), some teachers may
regard their employer’s teacher development programmes as a waste of time. Thus the
value of institutionally organized teacher development may depend on teachers’ attitudes
and perceptions of the rewards pursuing such opportunities and engaging in
developmental activities may bring. If done badly, or not supported, in-service training
can “hinder rather than help” growth and change (Day, 1999, p. 151), whilst Tomlinson
(1988) writes that such workshops and training can be both “dangerous” and “damaging.”
Day (2004) suggests that “planned or pre-meditated development can often be ineffective
when it does not address teachers’ personal-professional agendas” (p. 109).
Observation can be equally ineffective as a developmental tool, though it can raise
some awareness of what happens in a classroom (Bowen & Marks, 1994; Van Lier, 1988).
“Traditionally, [it] focuses on two general areas - the teacher and the lesson” (Bowen &
Marks, 1994, p. 34), typically looking at whole lessons or parts of lessons and on the
“content, focus and organisation of activity types [and/or] language produced by teachers
and students” (Lightbown & Spada, 1999, pp. 101-102).
Van Lier (1988) suggests “the most common form of… classroom observation
is… non-participant,” where the observer does not join in, and there is no “need to take...
participants’ perspectives” into account (pp. 40 & 41). Teaching, however, may be a very
personal business and the individual perspective might be more important than that of the
observer. Although some teachers may benefit from feedback after an observation, more
experienced ones, particularly those who have themselves been observers, might not.
Team-teaching, which “offers an alternative way… [and] allows teachers to work
together on a more equitable basis” (Head & Taylor, 1997, p. 193) might be a more
effective, less hierarchical way of observing lesson content, structure and delivery.
Some institutions, in an attempt to organize and structure teacher development,
may deploy personal development plans (Day, 1999) or, like the British Council and other
organizations, job plans with agreed goals and targets to be met within specified and
agreed time-frames (England, 1998). Impey and Underhill (1994, pp. 67-73) suggest a
“personalized in-service training programme” might include further qualifications or
courses, increased responsibilities, leading or attending workshops, seminars,
presentations or conferences, or going on secondment to another organization, but these
activities need planning, and some might also need funding. This, they say, will almost
certainly require someone to decide who goes to the conference and what the selection
criteria should be (ibid.). This is where teacher development becomes staff development,
70
when it is codified into a policy, and, as a result, ceases to be personal, becoming instead
something the institution determines, controls and directs.
There appears, then, to be a tension in teacher development. Some employers may
need to pay trainers for their time and also pay teachers to attend (Senior, 2006). Some
might, some might not. They might claim that teachers are paid to teach and that training
is not teaching. On the other hand, if teachers are not paid, or recompensed with time off,
they are essentially attending training courses in their (unpaid) free time, risking
resistance. Finally, some employers might not provide any in-service training or
development opportunities at all (Hobbs, 2013). Organized teacher development may
depend, therefore, on the willingness of the employer to support, resource or facilitate it.
Consequently, if the employer is reluctant to do this, teachers may need to assume
responsibility for their own growth, to ‘do-it-themselves’.
3.4.2 Self-initiated teacher development
If teachers decide to ‘do-it-themselves’, to identify their interests, develop a strategy,
secure the support they require, set the goals and time-frames then pursue those interests,
constructing meaning and knowledge from their own context and experience for
themselves (Richards & Farrell, 2005), they can find many possible avenues open to
them. They might read books or journals (Brewster, et al., 2002; Eraut, 1994; Head &
Taylor, 1997; Tsui, 2003), meet with colleagues (Eraut, 1994; Head & Taylor, 1997),
attend courses, workshops or conferences (Brewster, et al., 2002; Bowen & Marks, 1994;
Head & Taylor, 1997; Tsui, 2003), experiment with something new (Head & Taylor,
1997), teach a different class, age or level (Senior, 2006), change jobs, take on more
responsibility or a different occupational role (Head & Taylor, 1997), move to a new
country (Senior, 2006), observe children at work or at play (Moon, 2000; Pinter, 2006),
and reflect on students’ responses (Day, 1999) and classroom incidents, perhaps through
keeping a journal or a diary (Brewster, et al., 2002; Mann, 2005; Richards & Farrell,
2005; Richards & Lockhart, 1996).
They might also draw on their peers, through team-teaching, or sharing the
teaching of a lesson with a colleague (Head & Taylor, 1997; Mann, 2005; Richards &
Farrell, 2005), mentoring, or taking responsibility for guiding and advising a less
experienced colleague (Day, 1999; Senior, 2006), peer-coaching (Day, 1999; Richards &
Farrell, 2005), watching colleagues teaching, or peer observations (Head & Taylor, 1997;
Moon, 2000; Richards & Farrell, 2005), or formally evaluating teacher performance, or
appraisal (Day, 1999). They could set up teacher support or teacher development groups
71
(Brewster, et al., 2002; Head & Taylor, 1997; Richards & Farrell, 2005) where colleagues
who share interests or common challenges meet regularly and voluntarily to discuss those
issues in an informal environment and on an equal basis. They might even undertake
further study, for example taking a higher degree or a diploma (Senior, 2006). However,
some of these activities take time and some take money. Peer observation and team-
teaching, for instance, may be difficult to organize if, as is often the case in language
centres, most teachers are teaching simultaneously (Senior, 2006) and persuading a
manager to cover classes whilst the teacher observes a colleague or even the manager
could be difficult, especially if the teacher might leave the centre soon afterwards.
Teachers interested in their students’ learning experiences might seek feedback
from their learners through surveys, questionnaires or lesson reports (Moon, 2000;
Richards & Lockhart, 1996). They could conduct classroom-based investigations or
research within the centre (Brewster, et al., 2002; Head & Taylor, 1997; Pinter, 2006;
Richards & Farrell, 2005; Richards & Lockhart, 1996) or undertake a case analysis to
examine why a chosen strategy succeeded or failed (Brewster, et al., 2002; Richards &
Farrell, 2005). Similarly, an analysis of critical classrooms incidents can lead to
“strategies for intervention or change” (Richards & Lockhart, 1996, p. 6) since reflection
on “unplanned incidents… [can] trigger insights” (Richards & Farrell, 2005, p. 122),
understanding and action. They might also analyze their own classroom performances
using audio or videotaped lessons (Head & Taylor, 1997; Pinter, 2006; Richards &
Farrell, 2005; Richards & Lockhart, 1996).
Teachers might participate in focus groups or special interest groups (Mann, 2005)
and there are numerous forums, discussion boards and weblogs on the Internet through
which teachers can communicate with peers across the globe on a range of subjects and
issues. They can download ready-made lesson plans, resources, tips or ideas from, among
others, www.esl-library.com, www.onestopenglish.com and www.pearsonelt.com, which
has a community notice-board and articles written by practitioners giving tips and advice.
For example “Problems in the Primary Classroom: Prevention and Cure” (Wiffin &
Gibbons, 2013, retrieved from www.pearsonelt.com, April 2013) presents a range of
photocopiable classroom management ideas for primary practitioners which might be
directly applicable to a classroom situation and satisfy a teacher’s immediate needs. These
tips and techniques may also be the kind of information missing from the initial training
course. Similarly, Copland and Garton’s 2012 publication, Crazy Animals, consists of
fifty varied, graded activities for teachers of English Language to children of primary
school age, but what makes this book different is that the editors compiled it from
72
submissions made by practising Young Learner English Language teachers from a range
of different countries, so, for example, there are contributions from the Dominican
Republic (Activity 1), Georgia (Activity 2), Poland (Activity 15), Italy (Activity 29),
Croatia (Activity 38) and Egypt (Activity 45). This book not only presents ideas to
teachers that have been created, tested and recommended by other teachers, it also
provides those contributing teachers with a teacher development opportunity of their own,
namely seeing their ideas in print.
In addition, numerous self-help manuals are available (Rixon, 1992), ranging
from ready-made lesson plans to photocopiable reading activities, from communication
games to advice on using songs, chants, role-play and drama. There are also a number of
theory books, such as Brewster, Ellis and Girard’s Primary English Teacher’s Guide
(Penguin, 2002), Cameron’s Teaching Languages to Young Learners (Cambridge
University Press, 2001) and Moon’s Children Learning English (Macmillan, 2000), all
books combining theory with practical advice and ideas. Equally, there is a wide choice
of course-books available, most of which are accompanied by teachers’ guides, CDs,
activity books, DVDs and links to websites of more activities. Additionally, the
International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language (IATEFL)
provides 15 Special Interest Groups (SIG) for its 4,000 members, covering areas such as
Business English, English for Academic Purposes, Pronunciation and Young Learners
and Teenagers (YLT). IATEFL also had, at the time of writing, 120 affiliated teacher
associations from across the world. The annual conference in 2014 attracted around 2,500
delegates from 120 countries and had over 500 presentations and 70 exhibitors from
across the industry (IATEFL, 2014; Read, 2014). IATEFL is the closest body English
Language Teachers have got to a professional association. Through it, teachers can
engage in a range of developmental activity as outlined above. The Teacher Development
(TD) Special Interest Group emerged in 1985 as a “forum for interested teachers to
exchange ideas” (Head & Taylor, 1997, p. 7) and the Young Learner Special Interest
Group had, in 2014, 1,200 members connected through a website, a regular magazine
called C&TS and conferences. C&TS magazine contains articles on Very Young
Learners, primary and secondary English Language Teaching and is, according to the
editorial of 2014’s Issue 1, “grounded in the classroom realities of young learners and
their teachers” (C&TS, 2014, p. 3). Articles in this issue include a preview of the 2015
IATEFL conference in Manchester and reviews of conferences in Seoul and Cyprus, a
piece on story selection and dramatization for Very Young Learners, authenticity in the
Young Learner classroom, literacy proficiency in mixed-ability classes, the influence of
73
emotion on learning, using the FIFA football World Cup as a vehicle for teaching
equality, inclusivity and diversity to teenagers, developing literacy in bilingual children
and four articles on teaching children with specific needs. Whilst this is not an academic
peer-reviewed journal, it does provide teachers with practical advice and applicable
strategies and has a global reach, the participants coming from, among others, Cyprus,
Turkey, Sri Lanka, France, Germany, Argentina, Burma, Poland and Ireland.
Some organizations, including IATEFL, run web-based seminars, or webinars.
Cambridge University Press, for example, advertised three such webinars for December
2014, ‘Joined-up Blended Learning,’ ‘Teaching Adult Learners’ and ‘An Introduction to
the Cambridge English Corpus.’ These can be streamed ‘live’ or viewed later as
recordings. The advertisement reads: “Get inspiration and ideas for the classroom,
develop your career and keep on top of ELT trends with our webinar series” (Cambridge
University Press, 2014, advertisement emailed to the researcher). For teachers who lack
an in-house programme, such webinars could be vital elements in their development.
There are also many on-line training courses. For example, because “employers
now recognize that further training is an essential requirement for any teacher wishing to
enter the YL classroom successfully… Oxford TEFL has created a three-week online
course to prepare teachers for the demands of the YL classroom and help them stand out
from the crowd when applying for teaching positions” (Oxford TEFL, 2013). Oxford
TEFL is not the only one. The British Council provides a framework which claims to
“provide all teachers of English with a structure for their development and a large range
of resources, courses and opportunities to ensure that they develop continually throughout
their teaching careers” (British Council Global English Product Catalogue 2012, p. 36)
and “support, courses and resources for both pre-service and in-service training” (p. 35).
Among the courses provided in 2012 were Primary Essentials, CLIL Essentials, Using
Technology, Radio, Speaking and a Certificate in Primary English Language Teaching.
There is, for ‘Stage 4 (Proficient)’ teachers, a Certificate in Secondary English Language
Teaching (CiSELT) and, for ‘Stage 5 (Advanced),’ courses in Mentoring Skills and
Trainer Development.
One could pull all these strands together into a personal teacher portfolio
(Richards & Farrell, 2005), a collection of documents unique to the individual who
constructs it and containing testimonials, letters, lesson plans, critical incident analyses,
course outlines, sample lesson plans, videos, appraisals, certificates, indeed any artefact
that says who the teacher is, what they do, why they do it, where they have been and what
they have learned on their journey. It provides a holistic overview of a teacher’s life,
74
records experiences and reflections, maps growth and thus can be used to help construct
meaning within a career. It could also be used as a recruitment aid. Rather than presenting
a curriculum vitae, a résumé or a statement of behavioural competencies, teachers might
provide a teacher development portfolio instead.
3.4.3 Opportunistic teacher development
Development can be “sparked by sudden realization or gradual dawning” or
understanding of an incident (Senior, 2006, p. 67). It can come from a feeling of
dissatisfaction, with a particular model of teaching or with repeatedly using the same
course-books. “For language teachers the most effective professional development takes
place informally through interaction with their peers” (ibid., p. 77), with most teachers
discovering new models and ideas not from training but from reading, from colleagues or
from experimenting for themselves (Willis & Willis, 1996). Similarly, many teachers
have spent thousands of hours as students, with a life-time of exposure to a range and
variety of teaching strategies and approaches they can select, adopt or reject (Borg, 2003).
This is teacher development through an ‘apprenticeship of observation’ (Lortie, 1975),
where one learns about teaching by being a student and watching one’s own teachers.
Some teachers, especially beginners, develop by listening to other teachers (Eraut,
1994) and engaging in discussion, about lessons, about students, about teaching, about
materials, with their colleagues (Brewster, et al., 2002; Head & Taylor, 1997). Learning
from others, through “informal remarks, statements or stories that encapsulate what one
has gained from a lifetime of teaching” (Crookes, 2009, p. 8), at the water-cooler, by the
photocopier or in the café (Senior, 2006), can result in the informal transfer of ideas, from
teacher to teacher, from school to school, from country to country “as teachers travel the
world taking [these] ideas with them” (ibid., p. 67). A “vibrant folk culture” has grown
up around English Language Teaching as a consequence (ibid., p. 66), a folk-lore based
on the cumulative experience and history of many thousands of English Language
teachers (Crookes, 2009) which may be mutually developmental as both teacher and
school are enriched by new ideas, perspectives approaches and understanding. It is
perhaps this type of development that is most significant and the folk culture of teaching
English as a foreign language may be as influential as anything else in the industry on the
development of practice. However, there seems little published research, at present, into
how ideas travel and impact on practice in other countries. This might be a valuable
avenue for further research and build upon this current study.
75
3.4.4 The place of theory in teacher development
Despite development through folk-culture transmission, and the currency placed on
experience, it seems apparent that teachers, especially those working with Young
Learners, should have some knowledge of the academic theory that underpins their
practice in order to understand what they are doing. However, in teaching, there appears
to be a “scepticism about book learning” (Eraut, 1994, p. 52), a wariness of intellectual
theorizing, perhaps because it is “an essentially pragmatic orientation which stresses first-
hand experience in preference to abstract principles” (ibid., p. 52) or because the “strong
anti-intellectualism of the 1980s… [means]… propositional knowledge and a high
theoretical content” are no longer seen as necessary elements of expertise (ibid., p. 157).
Some writers, managers and teachers, finding “practical experience… (more useful than)
theory” (Hargreaves & Goodson, 1996, p. 5), seem dismissive of academics, experts and
theorists. “Who,” ask Bowen and Marks, “is in a better position to be an expert on
teaching - the doer or the theorizer?” (1994, p. 2). They suggest that an “overdependence”
on top-down knowledge transfer “leads to neglect of the teacher’s own expertise” (ibid.,
p. 2) and that relying on “authorities of any kind” leads to an “unnecessary and
debilitating degree of disempowerment [which] can degenerate into an abdication of
responsibility for (personal) development” (ibid., p. 5). In other words, become your own
authority through doing the job, not thinking about it. Furthermore, Wallace (1991)
suggests that the “tendency for the experts to be well removed from the day-to-day
working scene is more pronounced in teaching than in some other professions” (p. 2),
implying that experts on teaching do not actually teach on a regular basis.
Some writers suggest that academic researchers based in universities are not
necessarily concerned with the practical application of their ideas (Crookes, 2009) but
practical application is what most teachers want (Bullock, 2012; Ur, 1992). Some
teachers, in addition, may feel that academic theories about teaching are irrelevant to the
actual practice of teaching (Wideen, Mayer-Smith & Moon, 1996). This may be due to a
“lack of appropriate structures for knowledge exchange” (Eraut, 1994, p. 21) which could,
in turn, lead to a subsequent mutual suspicion, though journals, conferences and Internet
discussion groups could provide such structures. In addition, some teachers may feel that
academic theories challenge, criticize or threaten long-established practices, beliefs and
the ‘folk wisdom’ of the staff room (Hargreaves, 1984). Borg (2013) and Bullock (2012)
conducted research into how teachers read academic research and found that few actually
do. Twenty years earlier, Wallace suggested the existence of “a mutual contempt and
antipathy [with] researchers… contemptuous of teachers because ‘they never read’ [and]
76
teachers… antipathetic to researchers because the latter are seen as ‘refugees from the
classroom’ (1991, p. 11). Both Borg and Bullock seem to suggest this dichotomy between
theory and practice, academic and teacher is deep and divisive in the world of English
Language Teaching.
Research and academic theory, however, may be essential components of a
professional knowledge-based practice since “existing theory is used to interpret practice
and practice reshapes theory” (Eraut, 1994, p. 29). Furthermore, practice is often based
on theory (Crookes, 2009) and theory may help teachers question their own assumptions
and relate their personal experience to the wider field (Bullock, 2012).
Ur’s suggestions that “theory can and should be separated from practice” and that
“the function of the academic is to perform the research and discover theories which are
then handed down to the practitioner” (1992, p. 56) illustrates the gap between theorists
and practitioners, between thinkers and doers, between academics and teachers that might
not be found in any other profession, for instance law or medicine, and has engendered
what Senior (2006) identifies as a division in the English Language Teaching community
into a “higher level research-based culture that many busy teachers tend to ignore and a
lower-level practice-based culture in which newly trained teachers soon become
immersed” (pp. 66-7), what might be termed a ‘we don’t need the theory’ theory.
This separation of theory from practice has led to the Cambridge Certificate in
English Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA), for example, becoming an almost
wholly theory-free training course (Block & Gray, 2015) with the result that some
practitioners are unable to explain why their practice works, make informed decisions
about their teaching or adapt their knowledge to other contexts (Hobbs, 2013), such as
Young Learner classes. By cutting themselves off from educational theory (Kennedy,
1989) and relying more on experiential knowledge, some teachers “ignore the richness of
ideas generated by research” (Wideen, et al., 1996, p. 191) and limit their own
possibilities. Engaging with theory can make some teachers receptive to new ideas,
“foster and underpin attitude change” (Britten, 1988, p. 4) and facilitate flexibility, since
a reliance on experience alone can limit the possibility of change (Hargreaves, 1984),
especially for those teachers who refuse to acknowledge the possibility of truth beyond
their own classrooms. True knowledge, as Freeman (2002) notes, and as quoted earlier,
“depends on a plurality of views” (p. 8). That includes theory, and, “as an ideal, all
teachers ought to have theoretical qualifications as well as practical ones” (Kennedy,
1989, p.130) for theory can support not only principled practice but a deeper
understanding of practice. Without this understanding, practice becomes a recycling of
77
techniques, whether appropriate or not. Furthermore, when some techniques do not work,
theory provides something additional for teachers to draw upon (Senior, 2006). “If
teachers only have tools – craft – but little understanding… they may be ill-equipped to
cope with the demands of teaching” (Hughes & Williams, 1998, p. 2), such as flexibility,
versatility and managing change. However, for theory to be truly meaningful, it might be
better introduced when teachers have gained some practical experience against which it
might be measured and into which it might be integrated (Ur, 1992). Whenever it comes,
though, it seems essential that teachers have a grounding in theory as well as a set of
transferrable practical skills. Teacher and teaching development may need to be more
than a menu of survival tips.
In summary, whilst self-initiated development is individual, personally relevant
and meaningful because it is personally directed, and is therefore possibly the only true
route to real growth, there remain some concerns about its effectiveness. One issue may
be one of quality - if teachers are essentially responsible for their own learning, how do
they know they are designing syllabuses, writing materials or supervising staff effectively
(Borg, 2003)? In addition, if development relies on peers, for mentoring, team-teaching
or peer observation, a teacher’s development can only ever be as good as the people who
surround him. Opportunistic development and the folk culture of teaching English as a
foreign language may be useful in assimilating beginners into the industry but less useful
at teaching them anything beyond this. Moreover what the teacher learns from the staff
room, that, for example, a particular class or student is poorly motivated, that a particular
colleague might be incompetent or that teenagers are moody and sullen may actually
distort their knowledge and behaviour accordingly. Ultimately, teacher education, in-
service training workshops, job plans, observations and feedback might have little or no
impact on behaviour anyway (Borg, 2003). Some teachers may regard their job plan, the
training workshop, the observation as another hoop to jump, another box to tick,
something they must do to secure a new contract or a pay-rise but something they abandon
in the reality of the classroom. “Behavioural change does not imply cognitive change, and
the latter… does not guarantee changes in behaviour either” (Borg, 2003, p. 91).
If “teachers develop and change from the inside out, through individual practice
and reflection, and from the outside in, through contact with the experiences and theories
of others” (Graves, 1996, p. 1) and if teacher development is, of its nature, individualized
and personal, it follows that schools and employers cannot provide teacher development
any more than teachers can provide learning. All they can do is foster development by
creating an environment in which reflection and learning, and reflection on learning, are
78
encouraged and supported and, like the teacher in the classroom, hope that learning
occurs. ‘Do-it-yourself’ and ‘water-cooler-based’ development may not be sufficient. For
all this input to make sense, the teacher may need guidance, not necessarily in which
experiences and learning activities to pursue but in how to reflect on, articulate,
understand and ultimately assimilate those experiences.
3.5 Career pathways, cycles and future directions
English Language Teaching can appear to lack clear, discernible career pathways. Day
(1999) suggests an “over-reliance upon learning from experience” (p. 52) and an
assumption that the endpoint of development is ‘expert’ but with no clear sense of
whether an ‘expert’ is a theorist, a teacher or something else. Expertise may be moving
from “rigid adherence to rules” to “an intuitive grasp of situations based on deep tacit
understanding” (Eraut, 1994, p. 124), knowing how and why as well as what to do. Career
development may be learning how to apply process and situational knowledge to new
contexts. Huberman (1993, p. 3) defines career as a “series of sequences or maxi-cycles”
and prefers ‘trajectory’ to ‘pathway’ (1993, p. 94), although ‘trajectory’ suggests an
upwards movement which may not be reflected in a career’s reality. Dörnyei (2001)
suggests career is a “tapestry of personally meaningful advancement opportunities” (p.
164). In this thesis, career is a conjoined sequence of personally and occupationally
meaningful events.
Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1986) posit a five-stage model of novice, advanced
beginner, competent, proficient, expert (Day, 1999; Eraut, 1994; Tsui, 2003). This seems
to be a framework where “competence is the climax of rule-guided learning, proficiency
marks the onset of quite a different approach… [and] progression from proficiency to
expertise finally happens when the decision-making as well as the situational
understanding becomes intuitive rather than analytic” (Eraut, 1994, p. 126). In short,
‘expertise’ is the endpoint of development and competence is a stage on the journey from
novice to expert (Eraut, 1994).
Day (1999) outlines several different models, including Bolam’s five-stage
model (1990) of preparation, appointment, induction, in-service and transition and
Kremer-Hayon and Fessler’s eight-stage model (1991), which follows the teacher through
pre-service, induction, competency building, enthusiasm and growth, frustration, stability
and stagnation, wind-down and exit. This model may seem overly negative. Stability may
not necessarily co-exist with stagnation. It might lead to contentment.
Fessler and Christensen (1992) refine this into a cycle with the same stages but
79
with teachers moving in and out of the cycle as their circumstances change in what might
be termed phase-switching (Fessler, 1995). Leithwood (1990) relates his five-stage model
to the development of professional expertise and the psychological development of the
individual teacher and suggests that the career cycle moves from launching the career to
stabilization and commitment to addressing new challenges to reaching a plateau to
preparing for retirement.
Huberman (1993, p. 13) also suggests a five-stage model, of beginnings, or
“feeling one’s way” in years 1-3, of “stabilization and consolidation of a pedagogical
repertoire” in years 4-6, of experimentation and “diversification” leading to
“reassessment” of one’s aspirations, achievements and ambitions in years 7 to 25 leading
to a period of “affective distance” or “conservatism” in years 26 to 33 and a steady
“disengagement (serene or bitter)” in years 34 to 40. Stabilization requires one to self-
identify as a teacher (see also Senior, 2006, p. 69), whilst experimentation is “an active,
energetic, stimulating period” which can easily lead to frustration and disillusionment if
teachers cannot enact what they discover (Huberman, 1993, p. 249). This may lead to a
re-assessment of one’s career in the face of the “monotony of daily life in the classroom”
(ibid., p. 8) and seems to involve a degree of self-doubt that leads one to either move
forward or to surrender. Serenity, he says, is not a phase but a state of mind (ibid., p. 9).
One no longer has anything to prove so one may ‘switch off’ and achieve a ‘relational
distance’ from the job.
By 1995, Huberman appears to have refined his model: Survival and Discovery
(Years 1-3), Stabilization (Years 4-6), Experimentation and Diversification leading to
Stocktaking (Years 7 to 18), Serenity (Years 19-30) and Disengagement (Years 31-40)
(in Day, 1999). This is similar to Day’s own model (1999) of survival and discovery,
stabilization, new challenges, reaching a plateau and contraction of interest yet these
models suggest career pathways are continuous, linear processes underpinned by
elements of cause and effect. This may not necessarily be true (Day 1999). Teachers may
phase-switch as they change role, job or context. In addition, some teachers may never
stabilize, may never stop exploring and may never stock-take. They do not necessarily
travel through all the phases nor do they necessarily operate within a fixed time-frame.
Thus the “conceptual ordering of career phases into stages” is ‘delusional’ (Huberman,
1993, p. 4). A teacher’s career might consist of a series of “regressions, dead ends and
unpredictable changes of direction” (ibid., p. 4), false starts and forced finishes, what Day
(1999) terms “development disruption” (p. 51). Finally, given the potentially itinerant
nature of teaching English as a foreign language as a job, applying existing career models
80
outlined above, which appear to assume a lifelong occupational engagement, may be
difficult (Johnston, 1997). Nonetheless, their ideas might be applied to teaching English
as a foreign language on a micro-level, including jobs with short-term contracts.
Day and Bakioglu (1996) outline two possible four-phase models of a head
teacher’s career. These are initiation, idealism, uncertainty and adjustment, development,
autonomy and disenchantment, and they might apply to teachers too. Early enthusiasm is
tempered by the realism engendered by contextual constraints and followed by
consolidation and stabilization where the “actions are designed to maintain what is rather
than develop what might be” (ibid., p. 219). This leads to an extension phase of
experimentation or to a plateau of maintenance rather than expansion, with a lessening of
interest and engagement as the individual moves towards leaving the post. This seems a
clear, simple model that might be applied not just to a whole career but to each stage
within a career, to each role or context or change in responsibilities, to each mini-cycle.
Each of the models described above seems to have a preliminary, pre-service,
preparatory phase followed by what might be termed an in-service apprenticeship, where
beginning teaching is followed by some sort of skills refinement and consolidation of
skills into a recognizable repertoire and then a choices of directions. Veenman (1984)
describes the teacher’s growth cycle as moving through three ‘stages of concern’, where
they focus on, in turn, themselves and the mechanics of their teaching, then meeting
situational demands and finally on their students. This move, from self, to situation, to
student/staff, might be applied to different career roles. For example, a new manager
might be concerned initially with the mechanics of managing, move to a more holistic
view of how what they do impacts on, and is impacted on by the wider concerns of the
institution and then to the business of managing their employees. Brown’s 1986 ‘culture
shock’ model of excitement, host-culture intrusion leading to insecurity, acceptance and
assimilation might also be applied to a new role or responsibility. Here a new senior
teacher, for example, might feel excited by the possibilities afforded by macro-decision-
making, frustrated by the restrictions of situational realities, accept those restrictions and
finally assimilate them into their working practices.
Dörnyei (2001) describes contingent career pathways as being either closed,
where “the hierarchy of advancement has a clearly defined final or upper plateau” or open,
where “additional possibilities for continued career-related striving become apparent as
the individual moves along the career path” (p. 163). A closed path leads along a series
of established milestones to an established destination, for example a classroom teacher
becomes a head of department then a deputy headteacher then a headteacher. In the
81
context of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners, a classroom teacher
becomes a co-ordinator becomes a senior teacher becomes a director of studies. An open
path may be less linear, the individual pursuing opportunities off the path, as it were, for
example in consultancy, research, or freelance projects, although Dörnyei (2001) suggests
that English Language Teaching is a closed contingent path with management or training
(p. 169) being the only really viable options.
Pennington (1995, cited in Dörnyei, 2001, p. 164) describes a teacher’s career
path as a series of occupationally meaningful events, or roles, adapted and exemplified
by this researcher in Table 2 below to demonstrate its application to English Language
Teaching to Young Learners:
Meaningful event or role TEYL-related example
1. Increasing variety of classes Teaching 8 year olds and teenagers
2. Contributing to syllabus development Writing generic lesson plans
3. Contributing to teacher development Mentoring new teachers
4. Contributing to academic management Co-ordinating primary classes
5. Contributing to the TEYL community Presenting at a conference
6. Acting as a consultant Visiting local schools
7. Training other teachers Delivering INSET workshops
8. Developing materials and resources Writing worksheets
Table 2: Pennington’s eight-role career path of occupationally meaningful events
This seems a comprehensive summary of a career in teaching English as a foreign
language to Young Learners but, having performed all eight roles, a teacher may reach a
plateau, a point where going backwards or standing still is unattractive (Dörnyei, 2001).
In addition, the “constant repetitiveness and limited potential for intellectual
development” inherent in classroom teaching (ibid, p. 165) might become frustrating
since Huberman (1993) suggests a feeling of being ‘upwardly mobile’ is a key element
of job satisfaction. In fact, the dissatisfaction of some teachers of English as a foreign
language with their status, terms and conditions (Senior, 2006) may be compounded by
the fact that there are “few opportunities for promotion” and a potentially short career
ladder (ibid., p. 233). One can go from classroom teacher to senior teacher to director of
studies relatively quickly and master Pennington’s eight roles rapidly.
In some language centres, teachers can be promoted into co-ordinator, supervisor,
mentor or manager roles when they are still in the early part of their own occupational
lives, even within the first three years that Eraut (1994) and Veenman (1984) suggest is
82
the ‘beginning’ stage. Such beginning teachers may even find themselves training or
mentoring other beginning teachers. This may be particularly true where Young Learners
are concerned, where beginning teachers might be writing materials, designing the
syllabus or writing assessments with little knowledge, experience or understanding of
child development and learning. Rixon (1992) and Cameron (2003) write of the
difficulties of finding teachers with the right skills, and this may explain why some have
to adopt additional roles and responsibilities whilst they are still relative novices
themselves. Managers, however, need a range of additional, non-classroom-related skills.
They must handle teachers at different career-points, recruit, retain or dismiss members
of staff, deal with policy-makers, negotiate and control budgets, write contracts, delegate
tasks, create and manage teams, present the school to the public (Impey & Underhill,
1994). They need self-awareness, self-knowledge and self-management, of time, of work-
life balance, as well as knowledge of people, of situation, of educational practices and
concepts, and, in addition, may need to know how to plan strategically (Eraut, 1994). A
manager in English Language Teaching may never receive any training to help them fulfil
these roles (Impey & Underhill, 1994). In many organizations, classroom experience
alone seems to be viewed as sufficient preparation for leadership.
Although they may be informed by a “semi-conscious patterning of previous
experience” (Eraut, 1994, p. 67), experts in some situations revert to novice status in new
ones (Tsui, 2003, citing Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1986). They will develop new skills and
cognitions alongside the existing ones, resulting in what Tsui (2003, p. 279) terms
“multiple expertises”, or “distributed cognition”. For each cycle, teachers, materials
developers, managers begin again, as beginners, and teacher development is essentially
about learning to apply knowledge to the new, to assimilate the new and to construct the
new. Expertise is not just about routines, knowledge banks and experience but also about
responding effectively to different working contexts, adapting to change and developing
an appropriate range of responses to meet contextual/situational demands. With every
change, the development cycle begins again in a constantly evolving spiral and each spiral
repeats the same pattern, the same movement of novice to apprentice to expert to
disengagement, of excitement to insecurity to acceptance to assimilation, of enthusiasm,
consolidation, expansion and disengagement.
Kolb (1984) described this as an experiential learning cycle, of concrete
experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation
(in McDrury & Alterio, 2003), which leads back to concrete experience, reflection etc.
This seems to encapsulate the teacher’s career spiral, but, as McDrury and Alterio (2003)
83
point out “For meaningful learning to take place, the [subject] must reflect on experience,
generalize [it] to other situations, decide how to translate learning into action, then
evaluate the action” (p. 25). Learning, they suggest, is about finding meaning. In addition,
this can apply not only to individual students or teachers but also to organizations,
schools, institutions, even ministries and governments.
3.6 Reflection, experience and the construction of knowledge
Bailey (1997) claims that “reflective teaching is extremely valuable as a stance, a state of
mind, a healthy, questioning attitude toward the practice of our profession” (p. 12).
Without reflection, it may not be possible to grow, develop or progress in any meaningful
way. Moon (1999) suggests that reflection might lead to action, to decisions, or to
“resolutions of uncertainty” (p. 157), to the building of theory and to self-development,
and to the “emancipation of the self from the constraints of social and personal histories”
(p. 157). This “transformative learning” (p. 157) has three principal stages:
a) reflection on initial learning;
b) reflection in the process of the representation of learning;
c) reflection on the upgrading of learning. (p. 169).
This suggests a movement from first experience to observation and concretization to
experimentation and assimilation in a compression of Kolb’s cycle. However, effective
reflection and transformative learning can, however, only occur in the right conditions.
Teachers, she indicates, need time and space and, because reflection may involve risk-
taking, potential conflict and possible anxieties over the judgements of others, “an
emotionally supportive environment” (p. 169). “An overfilled curriculum is,” she adds,
“One of the greatest disincentives for teachers to give time to reflection” (p. 169).
Reflection, in other words, may be crowded out by other, more pressing priorities.
Reflection, and transformative learning, can be “sparked by sudden realization or
gradual dawning” of understanding of an incident (Senior, 2006, p. 67). It can come from
a feeling of dissatisfaction, with a particular model of teaching or with using the same
course books over and over again. This is development, but also a step on the pathway
from Novice to Expert, a stage where “extensive subject-area knowledge and broad
experiential base enables them to teach with confidence” (ibid., p. 76). ‘Expert’ may be a
state of mind as much as anything, and Senior indicates that this “shift in self-
perception… typically marks the process of transformation of language teachers from
inexperienced novices to self-directed individuals” (ibid., p. 77).
84
Senior (2006) considers a critical moment in a teacher’s life to be that when
teaching English as a foreign language ceases to be a temporary job and the individual
self-identifies as a teacher, the point when teaching English changes from ‘job’ to
‘occupation’, from pastime to career, from something one does to something one is.
Hitherto, teaching English as a foreign language in different countries outside one’s own
may simply have been a way to travel the world. Now it may be the reason to travel. Each
individual will reach this point at different times. Equally the nature of the teacher
development required, the sources of that development and the routes taken will also
differ. This implies that every teacher’s individual knowledge-base might be unique,
perhaps reflecting the contexts in which it was constructed and the individual
developmental routes the teacher has taken, and therefore it may be relevant only to the
individual who constructed it.
The construction of knowledge “always involves the creation of meaning from…
experiences (but) in the light of the meaning-maker’s pre-conceptions and tradition of
interpretation within which he or she acts” (Williams & Burden, 1997, p. 52), so
experiences can be interpreted and viewed through the prism of our beliefs and ideas
about the world and assimilated into an existing framework of knowledge based on those
previous experiences. In addition, learning and development do not occur in a vacuum.
There may always be a history to inform and underpin it (Vygotsky, 1978). In other
words, we are bound by our contexts because our contexts distort our perceptions and
consequently influence our interpretations. “Some parts of… teachers’ knowledge come
directly from teachers’ own experience and some… from teacher research” and includes
“experiences as a student” and “personal narratives and life histories” (Crookes, 2009,
pp. 11-12). Teachers may use their experiences to build upon previous experiences but
these could be filtered through their beliefs, values and ideas about teaching, about people
and about the world itself. Teacher development may be partially about helping teachers
assimilate new ideas into existing frameworks and partially about helping teachers
fashion new frameworks.
The evolution of a teacher may be context-influenced because the way in which a
teacher operates within and relates to the teaching-learning context influences their
thinking and feelings about their work, how they respond to challenges, and how their
beliefs about teaching and learning are formed. “The fact [is] that for language teachers
the most effective professional development takes place informally through interaction
with their peers” (Senior, 2006, p. 77), with most teachers discovering new models and
ideas not from training but from reading or from colleagues or from simply experimenting
85
(Willis & Willis, 1996). Teachers, however, may need to be at a particular stage of
occupational confidence, have the freedom to experiment with new methods, models or
techniques and the ability to justify the new, both to himself, to his students and to his
employers. This may be another ‘critical moment’, and could indicate the shift from one
phase to another.
Huberman (1993) suggests that essential to growth are “moments of vulnerability”
(pp. 257-8). These could include specific difficulties, realizations of fallibility, failures of
a reform, mid-life questioning, in short anything that leads to self-doubt. This, Huberman
claims, could be positive, leading to renewal or reinvigoration, or negative, leading to a
feeling of going in circles, problems with pupils, or stagnation and burn-out, still viewed
as indications of failure (Head & Taylor, 1997). Huberman (1993) also suggests that
teachers whose self-doubt fosters negative feelings may blame the institution, its
management and/or the students, implying that self-doubt must be managed and
channeled in such a way as to render it a positive experience for change.
Beginning teachers “are generally acknowledged to be strongly influenced by
their earlier experiences as pupils” (Eraut, 1994, p. 60) whilst “a language teacher’s
horizons will be shaped in part by her own personal experiences but also by traditional
ways in which other language teachers throughout history have made sense of what it
means to be a language teacher” (Williams & Burden, 1997, p. 52). Teachers may do this
through reading, engaging with the folk culture or formal training, but some teachers may
be unaware of the history of English Language Teaching as first an educational pathway
and latterly a commercialized industry, or ‘what it means to be a language teacher’,
particularly in the age of neo-liberal commodification of the English language and of
English Language education, and they may not even care and yet teachers are constantly
creating new meaning in new situations based on their experiences, perceptions,
responses and situational context, repeatedly constructing, deconstructing and
reconstructing their knowledge-bases (Golombek, 1998) and routines previously learned,
either wholly or partially, finding “meaning in experience” (Freeman, 2002, p. 11) to
facilitate change and growth.
“Learning,” wrote Vygotsky (1978), “Is more than the acquisition of the ability
to think; it is the acquisition of many specialized abilities for thinking about a variety of
things” (p. 83). It is the ability to “transfer general principles (or skills) discovered in
solving one task to a variety of other tasks” (ibid.). This seems to apply to the growth and
learning of a teacher, the move from beginner to expert appearing to require the ability to
transfer but also mutate skills to fit new tasks and go round again. “Learning to use an
86
idea in one context does not guarantee being able to use the same idea in another…
transferring from one context to another requires further learning and the idea itself will
be further transformed in the process” (Eraut, 1994, p. 20). The teacher should be
transformed too but, “for meaningful learning to take place, the (teacher) must reflect on
experience, generalize the experience to other situations, decide how to translate learning
into action, then evaluate the outcome” (McDrury & Alterio, 2003, p. 25). In other words,
true learning requires action on the part of the learner. “Learning about teaching, like all
learning, is an individual responsibility and an individual achievement… and… the
development work we do as teachers is our own responsibility” (Bowen & Marks, 1994,
p. 168). However, we cannot do it all alone.
As the teacher enters a new role, or a new phase, or a new classroom, so a gap
emerges between their current knowledge and experience and that which they need to
acquire to perform the role successfully, to facilitate that cycle from beginner to expert.
Following Vygotsky (1978), that gap, between the actual and the potential, might be
labeled a Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). The ZPD “defines those functions that
have not yet matured but are in the process of maturation…embryonic …buds or flowers
of development rather than the fruits of development” (ibid., p. 86). It describes “the level
of performance which a learner is capable of when there is support from … a more
advanced interlocutor” (Lightbown & Spada, 1999, p. 179). Williams and Burden (1997)
summarize the ZPD as “the layer of skill or knowledge…just beyond that with which the
learner is currently capable of coping (p. 40). As ‘learner’ might read ‘teacher’ in this
statement, so ‘advanced interlocutor’ might be replaced by ‘teacher development’. In
some cases, there may be actual support through “working with another [more competent]
person” (Williams & Burden, 1997, p. 40), a mentor, line manager, mediator or actual
interlocutor to help the teacher through the zone to maturation. In others, the mediator
might be an advanced course of study, or a journal article, or a critical incident, or a
moment of vulnerability, something that prompts reflection, and through reflection
learning. It seems the process of learning may be the same for teachers as it is for students.
Piaget wrote that “knowledge does not come from the outside… Nor is [it]
something we are born with. We must construct it… over many years” (in Donaldson,
1978, p. 140) and although some knowledge may be innate, other knowledge, such as
practical occupational knowledge, may need to be acquired and constructed. Teachers of
English to Young Learners, perhaps, construct their knowledge over a period of time,
through experience, through formal training, through career opportunities, pathways and
journeys, knowledge developed consciously or unconsciously that motivates and supports
87
them as they face the challenges of their chosen occupation.
3.7 Summary
Several issues emerge from the literature reviewed in this chapter that contributed to the
direction of the research, provided preliminary if tentative answers to the research
questions and helped shape the content of the questionnaires and interviews. These points
are summarized below:
In terms of the first research question, most teachers of English as a foreign
language seem to face the twin challenges of reality shock (Veenman, 1984) and culture
shock (Brown, 1986), particularly when working in a culture different from their own,
and these basic challenges seem to involve making the transition from trainee to teacher
and from one culture to another. In addition, teachers of English to Young Learners may
face the following challenges:
Managing behaviour (Brewster, Ellis & Girard, 2002; Moon, 2000);
Motivating Young Learners, especially teenagers (Lindstromberg, 2004; Puchta
& Schratz, 1983), who are attending classes in their ‘free’ time;
Selecting and sequencing appropriate resources and activities (Cameron, 2001;
Moon, 2005);
Managing children’s emotions (Gorham, 1985; Lewis, 2007);
Building relationships with learners, parents and employers where perceptions of
social status may bring about an imbalance of authority, particularly between the
teacher and the young learner (Beder & Darkenwald, 1982; Ellis, 2013).
These may be specific to Young Learners because they derive from some general
characteristics of children, including:
short attention spans (Brewster, 1991; Vassiliou, 2014);
emotional volatility (Brewster, et al., 2002; Gorham, 1985);
lack of obvious need to learn English as a foreign language (Graves, 1996);
limitations in their own cognitive abilities and literacy levels especially in the
skills that underpin teaching English as a foreign language (Cameron, 2003) such
as listening (Slaven & Slaven, 1991) and reading and writing (Machura, 1991)
where they may still be developing in their own language (Brewster, et al., 2002;
Pinter, 2006).
In addition, in the private language centre context, teachers may also be asked to teach a
wide range of ages and ability levels, often in the same class (Rixon, 1992). Addressing
these challenges may require a repertoire of practical techniques and knowledge of child
88
development and language learning theories and frameworks (Brumfit, 1991; Holderness,
1991; Pinter, 2006). This research assumes that the majority of teachers of English to
Young Learners in the private language centre sector lack this knowledge.
In terms of the second research question, the literature indicates that training and
development in teaching English to Young Learners appears essentially optional and it
cannot be assumed that all teachers engage with further, formal training once they have a
job (Emery, 2012; Ferguson & Donno, 2003; Senior, 2006). Teacher development can
take different forms:
Institutionally organized, for example in-service training workshops, job plans,
probationary periods, line-management, mentoring (Richards & Farrell, 2005);
Self-initiated development through activities such as reading, action research,
experimenting with different techniques and ideas, changing jobs, talking to other
teachers (Head & Taylor, 1997);
Informal development through peer interaction (Senior, 2006) leading to
transmission of English Language Teaching/Young Learner English Teaching
folk-lore across the world as globally mobile teachers (Crookes, 2009) transfer
ideas, theories and knowledge from context to context.
The literature seems to suggest that teachers prefer the last two to the first, and are
generally sceptical of academic theory in comparison with practical experience. In
addition, in a private language centre context, it may not always be possible to undertake
some types of teacher development because of size, financial limitations or commercial
pressures. Nonetheless, well qualified, knowledgeable teachers could possibly be good
for business and it may be in the interests of commercially minded employers to recruit,
and market, the best they can get in order to challenge the competition.
In terms of the third research question, it appears that whilst there are a number
of opportunities for advancement in teaching English as a foreign language to Young
Learners, the career pathway itself might be limited, in effect, to training or management
(Dörnyei, 2001). In addition, Pennington’s eight meaningful events (in Table 2 above)
can occur within a few years if the teacher is in a small centre with few specialists or is
particularly ambitious. Once they have reached the eighth rung on Pennington’s ladder,
however, there seems nowhere else to go, except out of the classroom altogether.
Attitude seems a critical factor in both and career development (Dörnyei, 2001;
Senior, 2006). In addition, it seems that other factors in helping teachers meet the
challenges of English Language Teaching to Young Learners include:
89
reflection on concrete experience leading to realization of knowledge gap;
positive attitude leading to receptiveness to new ideas;
assimilation of new knowledge gained from training or development;
using new knowledge to inform new action.
In a private language centre context, career progression might be rapid or accelerated.
Size of centre and teaching staff can allow opportunities for teachers with little experience
or formal training to write materials or design courses or induct, train and mentor other
teachers. In a globalized industry teachers can take their skills and knowledge around the
world from centre to centre, network to network, country to country, developing as they
travel, and in this way the folk-culture of teaching English as a foreign language may
thrive. This study uses the voices of teachers themselves to explore the notions, theories
and ideas discussed in this chapter, and Chapter Four describes the research methodology
and process that underpinned it.
90
Chapter Four
Methodology
This chapter outlines the phenomenological paradigm and constructivist tradition within
which this thesis is situated and the methodological approach and research methods
adopted as a result. It explains why an integrated, mixed-method approach was chosen
before describing and evaluating the methods and procedures themselves. It is in nine
sections. The first, 4.1, reviews the research purpose and questions whilst 4.2 discusses
some research traditions and approaches. 4.3 describes some research methods associated
with those traditions and explains why questionnaires and interviews were selected. 4.4
discusses ethical issues and how these were addressed whilst 4.5 describes the sampling
methods and the samples themselves. 4.6 explains how the questionnaires and interviews
were constructed, piloted, revised and distributed. 4.7 explains how data were processed
and analyzed to answer the research questions. Finally 4.8 considers aspects of
authenticity, credibility and data triangulation and explains how this researcher addressed
those matters. Key points are summarized in the last section, 4.9.
4.1 Overview and purpose
This study explores some of the challenges involved in teaching English as a foreign
language to Young Learners aged up to 16 years old in private language centres outside
their home countries through empirical research into teaching practices and attitudes. It
also investigates how training and subsequent occupational development helps teachers
meet those challenges. Its purpose is to complement and develop existing research into
both teaching Young Learners the English language and teacher development discussed
in Chapters Two and Three above. In fusing these areas, this study reveals how untrained
teachers operate in Young Learner classrooms and how they manage their own
occupational growth. The research focuses on the commercial private sector because
previous research seems to have neglected it in favour of the public, state-maintained
sector, making current knowledge of Young Learner English Language Teaching practice
incomplete. This research brings, therefore, a new dimension to that existing knowledge
by addressing three questions:
1. What challenges face teachers of English as a foreign language to Young
Learners in private language centres?
2. What opportunities for training and development are available to those teachers?
91
3. How do these opportunities help teachers meet the challenges of teaching English
as a foreign language to Young Learners?
Question One investigated challenges such as managing child development,
learning, behaviour and motivation as suggested by the literature (see 3.1 and 3.2 above).
Question Two investigated different aspects of teacher development (see 3.3 and
3.4 above) which indicated that training specific to teaching English to Young Learners
seems optional, that continuing occupational development is not guaranteed and that this
development can take several pathways.
Question Three considered how effectively teachers had made the adjustment
from a teacher of adults to a teacher of Young Learners. 3.5 and 3.6 above suggested that
teaching English as a foreign language may offer a limited choice in terms of career
options and indicated that motivation might be an important factor in determining how
successfully a teacher can adapt their adult-oriented training to a Young Learner context
whilst pursuing a progressive career. The research aimed to explore motivation and
attitude as factors in teacher development.
In summary, then, the research asked teachers of English as a foreign language,
both native and non-native speakers, to describe their preparation for teaching English as
a foreign language to Young Learners and the management of the subsequent
development of both their teaching and their careers.
4.2 Research paradigms and methodological approaches
This study examines people in their contexts, exploring their experiences, feelings and
attitudes and considering events from their perspectives and therefore seems situated
within the phenomenological paradigm described by Richards (2003) as dealing with
‘lived experience’ and trying to understand the nature of that experience. The aim of
phenomenological research is, he says, “to penetrate to the essential meaning of human
experience” and “[focus] on our self-understanding as active, meaning-making
participants in the human world” (ibid., p. 13). Croker (2009, p. 15) claims that
phenomenology “describes the meanings that several individuals make from experiencing
a single phenomenon,” in this case teaching English as a foreign language to Young
Learners in a private language centre in a foreign context, and tries to distil those
meanings into a “composite description of that experience” (ibid., p. 15) that resonates
with the participating individuals. Given that phenomenology’s starting point is the
exploration of experience, identifying and then interviewing a number of people who have
92
had this experience may be an appropriate approach. Richards suggests between ten and
twenty (2003, p. 19). As he indicates, “if we want to understand more about the
experience of teaching, this tradition offers a potentially interesting way forward” (ibid.,
p. 20).
The research could have been conducted ethnographically, for example by
following a group of Young Learner English teachers in a centre, observing, interviewing
and gathering field notes, but this needs the kind of access to overseas language centres
that was impractical for this researcher, given that Richards views as “methodologically
unacceptable” what he calls ‘blitzkrieg’ ethnography, or “quick forays into the field in
order to scoop up data and retreat” (2003, p. 13). As he suggests, if observation is
unavailable, another tradition should be chosen. Consequently, this research pursues a
phenomenological approach to gather human experiences, using interviews and
questionnaires to collect those experiences and construct realities from individual
particularities (Dörnyei, 2007; Thomas, 2009), for this research also adopts a
constructivist position.
Richards suggests that constructivists view reality as “essentially a construction
based on the interaction of the individual with the environment… [where] all truths, like
all investigations and understandings, are value-laden” (2003, p. 36), or informed and
influenced by social context, attitudes, beliefs and values. This view that reality is
shifting, subjective and determined by context and people contrasts with positivism which
holds that reality is objective, measurable and single and contains observable truths
(Croker, 2009). Constructivists may tend to focus on individual perspectives whilst
positivists might be more concerned with concrete outcomes and results. This research
tries to give voice to individual points of view, “to let the voices of the participants
emerge” (Richards, 2003, p. 193). Consequently, the kind of person-centred qualitative
approach that Richards claims as “particularly appropriate to our work in the field of
language teaching” (ibid., p. 9) was adopted, with the intention of constructing teachers’
lived experiences of teaching English to Young Learners in private language schools in
international contexts and thus developing current knowledge of practices in that area.
In qualitative research the data is primarily textual, although numerical might be
used to supplement, complement and support it. Seeking to identify and understand
behaviour and attitude in context, qualitative research “mostly focuses on understanding
the particular and the distinctive, and does not necessarily seek or claim to generalize
findings to other contexts” (Croker, 2009, p. 9). Indeed, Croker suggests that some
qualitative researchers allow readers to generalize findings to their particular contexts for
93
themselves, letting the data speak for itself (Richards, 2003). Qualitative research can,
however, appear to some critics to be a collection of unverifiable, and therefore
unreliable, anecdotes which lack credibility (Nunan, 1992). Anecdotes, though, can still
be data and can be validated by comparing them with each other, with other experiences
and with the existing literature. Anecdotes, too, can resonate with readers and thus have
convergent credibility (see 4.8 below), although Dörnyei (2007) points out that some
qualitative researchers can ‘over-read’ the stories in attempts to broaden their relevance,
thereby undermining their credibility. In qualitative research, it seems, context and the
individual’s interaction with that context, is critical. This emphasis on the individual, and
the recognition that context may influence response and therefore data, contrasts with
quantitative research, which aims at presenting a “macro-perspective of… overarching
trends” by “collecting and analysing empirical data using standardised procedures” and
presenting that data in numerical form, usually in tables or graphs (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 29).
A potential issue with this type of research is that, although it may appear to be objective,
scientific and therefore ‘true’, it can, in undervaluing the individual perspective, result in
“simplistic, de-contextualized and reductionist” statistics (ibid., p. 45).
Croker (2009) notes that some researchers, “especially [in] education” (p. 16) and
investigating teachers, learners or language users, seem to prefer to combine or integrate
elements from both qualitative and quantitative research. Perhaps this is because
considering both general macro-perspective and “context-sensitive micro-perspective”
(Dörnyei, 2007, p. 29) and using both ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ analysis in a mixed-
methods approach could result in a fuller, more complete understanding of an issue than
is possible with just one approach. A mixed-method, integrated approach can illuminate
both what is happening and why it is happening (Croker, 2009; Dörnyei, 2007; Miles &
Huberman, 1994; Nunan, 1992). Ivankova and Creswell (2009) illustrate this below:
A researcher collects both numeric information (for example,
through closed-response items on questionnaires) and text (from
face-to-face interviews) to better answer a study’s research questions
(p. 137).
Integrated approaches, however, raise some possible issues for researchers, particularly
over the timing (when to gather the data and in what order), weighting (deciding which
element is more prominent) and mixing (or combining together) the various strands
(Ivankova & Creswell, 2009).
In this study, following Ivankova and Creswell (2009), qualitative data was
gathered concurrently, after the quantitative, to explain or explore the numerical data
collected first through interviewing a new, authenticating sample. Mixing occurred when
94
the interview questions emerged from the quantitative data. Qualitative findings were
used to refine, explain, clarify and extend the quantitative findings, and the quantitative
findings used to crystallize and summarize the qualitative. Here, the weighting is equal,
because the questionnaire comprised a mix of open and closed items and thus enabled
qualitative data to be collected at the same time as the quantitative. Thus, in this study,
both the approach and the data collection tools themselves were integrated in a way that
seemed consistent with the mixed-methods approach and which allowed the data to be
internally authenticated and verified. The data yielded by each instrument are reported in
Chapter Five.
In summary, this study is situated in a phenomenological and constructivist
tradition because it is concerned with constructing and interpreting experience-in-context.
Consequently, it leans towards a qualitative approach with its emphasis on personalized
and particular text-based data, but since it also makes use of statistical data to summarize
and illustrate trends and themes, it integrates some quantitative approaches into a mixed-
methods survey, specifically descriptive statistics drawn from closed-response
questionnaire items and quotations, anecdotes and examples from open-response
questionnaire items and semi-structured interviews. These are discussed more fully in
Sections 4.3 and 4.6 below.
4.3 Research methods and data collection tools
“Asking questions is widely accepted as a cost-effective (and sometimes the only) way
of gathering information about past behaviour and experiences, private actions and
motives, beliefs, values and attitudes (i.e. subjective variables that cannot be measured
directly)” (Foddy, 1993, p. 1). Such an approach seemed appropriate for this research,
given that the aim of qualitative, phenomenological research is to engage with lived
human experience in context (Richards, 2003). Tools aimed at collecting personal data
describing both experience and context can include questionnaires, interviews,
observations, case studies, diaries and journals (Brown & Rodgers, 2002; Cohen, Manion
& Morrison, 2007; Croker, 2009; Dörnyei, 2007; Hopkins, 2002; Nunan, 1992; Seliger
& Shohamy, 1989). The range of data collection instruments for qualitative research
seems particularly wide and, with a blend of question-types, all can be used to yield a rich
and deep set of data on a variety of subject and issues. This section describes and evaluates
some of those methods and explains why questionnaires and interviews were chosen for
this particular study and others, such as observation, case study and journals were not.
95
4.3.1 Some qualitative data collection methods
Richards (2003) suggests that different data collection methods allow researchers to focus
on different aspects of a question. For example, if behaviour is the focus of attention,
observation may be useful whilst interviews can focus on ideas, beliefs and how people
see the world. The methods adopted might, therefore, be determined by the type of data
the researcher wishes to collect and the nature of the issue under investigation. For this
particular research, a number of avenues were considered, including field-notes, diaries,
case studies and narratives, as well as questionnaires and interviews.
Narratives appear to consist of four basic elements, context, defined by McDrury
and Alterio (2003) as the physical, cultural, social and political aspects of a story,
construction of knowledge through active listening, collaboration, where tellers and
listeners “work together to construct new knowledge,” and conversation, or how “those
involved articulate experience and engage in reflective dialogue” (p. 35) on the narrative
itself. Golombek (1998) suggests that the “narrative reconstruction of experience leads to
an articulation of personal practical knowledge (PPK), which acts as an interpretive [and
possibly reflective] framework” (p. 459). Teachers’ narratives, however, can be
unreliable, changeable or biased (Borg, 2003; Johnston, 1997; Senior, 2006; Tsui, 2003)
according to the purpose of the narrative, of the story-telling itself and the recipient
audience, for instance exaggeration in job applications or inflated accounts in the
staffroom intended to impress newcomers. It may, additionally, be difficult to generalize
from narratives if they and the experiences they describe are so context-embedded as to
be context-specific rather than universally relevant. Yet because “narratives ground
[teachers’] beliefs and values within the context of classroom events” (Golombek, 1998,
p. 448) they can still illuminate teacher practice if events resonate beyond contexts to be
recognizable to other teachers. This will be where an awareness of some of the universal
characteristics of children may be useful, for example the shorter attention span or the
need for learning to be fun (Moon, 2000). Narratives can be acquired from diaries or
journals, but also constructed from interviews and questionnaires.
Field-notes, journals, diaries and observations can provide direct insights into
teacher practice and behaviour. Field-notes report “observations, reflections and reactions
to classroom problems” made during or after a lesson (Hopkins, 2002, p. 103). They can
be issue-oriented, concentrating on “one particular aspect of teaching or classroom
behaviour…, [or] reflect general impressions of the classroom, its climate or incidental
aspects” (ibid., p. 103). Kept by the teacher or by an observer, they can be useful in
compiling case studies. For this particular research, field-notes could support an
96
investigation into how teachers deal with Young Learner-specific issues such as pupil
behaviour, classroom management and classroom control as well as, if kept
longitudinally, provide an impressionistic record of the teacher’s development. This
would, however, require either observing classes or asking teachers to make field-notes
themselves, and this requires access to an appropriate classroom or staff room.
Diaries, used to record and reflect upon experiences (Elliott, 1991), “can… get at
those aspects of classroom teaching that more external forms of research such as
observation and interviews cannot reach” (Numrich, 1996, p. 132) and can be a “powerful
means for teachers to explore practice” (Holly, 1989, p. 71). They provide “an insider
account… [of] time-related evolution or fluctuation within individuals” (Dörnyei, 2007,
p. 157). Like narratives, they can be anecdotal and possibly subjective but may also enable
insights into the often invisible emotional aspects of teaching and teachers’ lives
(Wallace, 1998) such as motivation, job satisfaction and self-esteem which can influence
or determine a teacher’s behaviour (Numrich, 1996). Diarists, however, may be prone to
forgetfulness, subjectivity and variability, and entries can vary in quality and depth
(Dörnyei, 2007), challenging their reliability.
Whilst diaries are essentially a collection of private reflections (Elliott, 1991),
journals might be written as public documents. In this case, they may be edited for an
audience. They might, as a result, “lose some of the truthfulness of a diary but… gain in
accessibility” (Wallace, 1998, p. 62) if the content is presented in a reader-friendly style.
The act of writing, though, “can make the implicit explicit, and therefore open to analysis”
(Holly, 1989, p. 71), revealing behavioural patterns and events (Nunan, 1992) and beliefs,
motivations, assumptions, aspirations and previously unknown strengths that might
otherwise remain hidden (Bailey, 1990).
For this research, diary and journal accounts would provide insights into the daily
lives of teachers of English as a foreign language to Young Learners, reveal awareness of
their development and developmental needs and show how critical moments impact upon
them. However, such journals or diaries would need to be kept over a period of time and
some teachers’ demands, for example meetings, planning and marking, may render
keeping a reflective journal or diary difficult (Moon, 1999), especially when Bailey
(1990) recommends “the time allotted to writing about the language teaching... should at
least equal the time spent in class” (p. 220). A teacher with three two-hour classes a day
would be spending six hours a day writing a reflective diary. This may be impractical.
Pupil diaries might provide an interesting counterbalance to teacher diaries,
permitting a different perspective on teacher development, and could be a valuable source
97
in evaluating the impact of training and development activities on the classroom
interactions they are designed to enhance. However, alongside issues of accessibility and
of identifying and working with an appropriate group, there may be ethical concerns
linked to confidentiality and parental permission. It is also possible that some younger,
less proficient or less articulate learners might not be able to express their views
effectively. Nonetheless, a consideration of the perspective of a stakeholder group such
as learners might prove illuminating, particularly if managers’ or trainers’ perceptions
were also explored in a ‘between-method triangulation’ process (Richards, 2003).
A case study is a “relatively formal analysis of an aspect of classroom life”
(Hopkins, 2002, p. 124). A teacher’s entire career or a specific situational response might
be the subject of a case study. For this research, case studies, providing detailed
information about specific experiences or career decisions, might be valuable but case
studies can be difficult to generalize from because they are, by their nature, context-
embedded (Dörnyei, 2007; Nunan, 1992). Nevertheless, a number of case studies might
provide interesting data for a phenomenological study by enabling comparisons of
practice, systems and motivations. However, the twin constraints of time-bound research
and long-term access to appropriate teachers ruled case studies out in this instance.
Observations can provide data on a number of aspects of teaching including
classroom practice, organization, interaction and language use (Bowen & Marks, 1994;
Lightbown & Spada, 1999; Van Lier, 1988). They can be video or audio-recorded, thus
creating a permanent record, although recording might be viewed as intrusive by some
teachers (Hopkins, 2002; Wallace, 1998). Observation can also take place in ‘real time’
with a non-participant observer taking notes on areas agreed with the teacher beforehand
(Elliott, 1991). Such an observer might not know either class or teacher and may not need
to consider classroom events from the students’ perspectives (Van Lier, 1988), although
this does not necessarily mean they are objective. Their stance may depend on the
observation’s purpose and aim. Nonetheless, observations might yield both quantitative
and qualitative data depending on their focus and purpose. However, the researcher might
need to visit a number of centres in order to achieve a diversity of response. In this study,
classroom observation was impractical given the research context (language centres in
foreign language contexts, and countries other than the United Kingdom) and therefore
was not considered as a data collection method. However, were the research to be
repeated in a different context, observation might prove a valuable means of illuminating
teaching practice in the Young Learner classroom.
98
Two methods, questionnaire and interview, can facilitate a blend of quantitative
and qualitative data by combining numbers gathered from questionnaires with oral data
recorded in face-to-face interviews (Ivankova & Creswell, 2009). These were the
methods chosen for this research, although there may be several potential problems with
using questions to gather data, including invalid answers due to the misinterpretation of
questions and the possibility that attitudes, beliefs and values may change over time or in
a new or different context (Foddy, 1993). This might undermine the potential reliability
of questioning as a data collection method, although the possible impact of this
unreliability factor could be reduced by clarity of wording, avoidance of ambiguity and
cross-sample referencing for response-consistency and convergence. Some of these issues
are considered below.
4.3.2 Questionnaires
In addition to being cheap to construct and distribute, especially by email (Brown &
Rodgers, 2002; Cohen, et al., 2007; Dörnyei, 2002; Seliger & Shohamy, 1989; Thomas,
2009), questionnaires can provide a “quick and simple way of obtaining broad and rich
information” (Hopkins, 2002, p. 117) from a wide, diverse and global population and
yielding simple, quantifiable data of the ‘3 out of 6 answered NO to item 2’ type.
Questions (or items) can be closed, with a limited range of responses permitted, for
example dichotomous questions where the answers are restricted to one of two options,
usually ‘yes’ and ‘no’ (Thomas, 2009), true-false statements, agree/disagree questions,
multiple-choice items, rating-scales or rank-order tasks. They might employ Likert scales,
where “respondents are asked to register their reactions on a 4-3-2-1 scale” (Brown, 2002,
p. 120) and where a researcher is investigating “a situation where belief or attitude is to
be measured” (Thomas, 2009, p. 179). Other items might be open, requiring short written
answers, or sentence completion tasks. They might contain a mix of both. However,
because they need to be kept simple and fairly general so that they can be completed at a
distance and with minimal supervision, they can result in “unreliable and invalid… [as
well as]… superficial data” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 115) especially if the respondent does not
understand a question. A further issue with questionnaires may arise from respondents’
reading ability (Hopkins, 2002). Given that this study involved teachers of English as a
foreign language, the researcher assumed the literacy level to be unproblematic.
Additionally, items used in these questionnaires were referenced against the research
questions and drawn from the literature (Dörnyei, 2002; Nunan, 1992; Richards, 2003).
99
Whilst closed-response items can elicit codable, classifiable data, open-response
items can elicit textual data similar to that of an interview. Such items “require
respondents to answer in their own words… [and] provide a way to find out, in an
unstructured manner, what people are thinking about a particular topic or issue” (Brown,
2009). These items may be particularly useful for exploratory research.
Brown (2009) suggests that different types of open-response items can yield
different types of information. For example, sentence-completion items, in which
respondents finish a sentence using either their own words or a given prompt, or short-
answer items requiring single words or short phrases can help focus attention on a specific
idea. On the other hand, broad, open-questions which require longer writing of perhaps
several lines or even a paragraph can elicit more reflective responses. One additional
benefit of open-response items is that they allow respondents to state things the researcher
may not have considered, possibly widening the research perspective or suggesting other
avenues of inquiry. They can also provide illustrative quotations and examples that offer
“depth and colour to the data” (ibid., p. 205) and allow respondents room to expand their
answers and detail their experiences. However, such responses can take more time to
write than closed-response items and may, perhaps, be used more effectively in
combination with other, shorter item-types, expanding them into a fuller account.
However, whilst questionnaires can yield a diversity and depth of different data-
types, integrate qualitative and quantitative approaches and potentially reach a global
sample via the Internet, they have several drawbacks. First, the researcher is wholly
reliant on people returning them and this may be outside his control, particularly if those
invited to respond have no intrinsic motivation to do so. Furthermore, there is no
guarantee that the responses are true and no means of totally verifying those responses
except through evaluating their plausibility (Brown, 2009). In addition, people may miss
some items or stop prematurely, especially if the questionnaire seems long, and this may
limit the scope of the questionnaire designer somewhat. Items that require lengthy
responses may be omitted in favour of rating-scales, rank-order questions and tick-box
options in order to persuade respondents to do it and some may be simplified in the
interests of maximizing returns. Nonetheless, despite the potential disadvantages,
questionnaires can, at the push of a computer key, yield rich data from a lot of people in
different parts of the world and that data authenticated for validity and reliability. For this
research, questionnaires seemed the most practical method of gathering data from a range
of teachers and contexts. The questionnaire is described in 4.6.1 below and their
validation in 4.8.
100
4.3.3 Interviews
Richards describes an interview as a ‘conversation with purpose’, claiming that even
informal encounters can be interviews “when the researcher designs their contribution to
elicit responses… on a particular topic” (2003, p. 51). Any orally interactional event can
be an interview, if it has design and purpose, and Richards underlines this view with his
“golden rule for interviewing: always seek the particular” (ibid., p. 53). Furthermore, he
suggests that “the aim of the qualitative interview is not merely to accumulate
information, but to deepen understanding” (ibid., p. 64) and Rapley (2001) claims
interviews “allow a rich, deep and textured picture” (p. 315) of a situation or experience
to be drawn. Interviews in this research were designed to deepen understanding.
Interviews can be viewed as a resource, offering a “window onto life beyond the
interview” or as data itself “reflecting a reality jointly constructed by the interviewee and
the interviewer” together (Rapley, 2001, p. 305). In addition, there are a number of
different qualitative interview approaches, including phenomenological, ethnographic,
feminist, oral history and life history, and dialogic or confrontational interview, and
whilst they all used question-and-answer as their basic formats, the purposes of each
approach are different. “Phenomenological interviews are commonly used to elicit…
descriptions of concrete lived experiences [whilst] ethnographic interviews are
frequently… to do with [questions of] culture and oral history interviews have been
used… to construct historical accounts” (Roulston, 2010, pp. 28-29).
Phenomenological interviews “generate detailed and in-depth descriptions of
human experiences” using open questions to explore “feelings, perceptions and
understandings” (Roulston, 2010, p. 16), with all the interviewees having experienced the
phenomenon under in investigation and able to articulate that experience. Roulston goes
on to suggest that the interviewer’s role is to “listen carefully, follow up on participant’s
responses without interrupting the story… and generally exercise reservation in
contributing to the talk” (ibid., p. 17). This means, according to Roulston, that the
interviewer does not challenge the interviewee.
This style of interviewing contrasts with some proposed by Rapley (2001) and
Richards (2003, 2009) who suggest the interviewer should not be a neutral facilitator but
an involved, engaged ‘co-constructor’ of data. Rapley (2001) claims that “interview
language is not a neutral carrier for information” (p. 307) but a means of controlling,
directing and constructing the data and that the whole interaction itself is therefore data
requiring constructionist analysis of the interviewer’s talk as well as the interviewee’s.
Here, the interview itself “becomes a topic of study rather than a resource for discussing
101
particular research questions” (Roulston, 2010, p. 61). By contrast, a neo-positivist model
assumes that interviews can “generate objective findings… [and] provide meaningful and
stable data concerning interior states of mind” (ibid., p. 55). This position raises a number
of issues, including the possibility that interviewees do not necessarily tell the truth, nor
remember things accurately and may, occasionally, exaggerate their accounts in order to
present themselves positively (Rapley, 2001; Richards, 2009; Roulston, 2010). In
addition, neo-positivists do not usually consider the interviewer’s role in co-constructing
the data. In order to address those issues, Roulston (2010) suggests using other research
methods to authenticate interview data, for example questionnaires or participant
feedback on initial findings, a form of validation by the sample members themselves, a
form adopted by this researcher for this study and explained in 4.8 below.
Interview formats vary. They can be single, with one participant, or multiple, with
more than one (Brown & Rodgers, 2002; Cohen, et al., 2007; Dörnyei, 2007; Nunan,
1992; Seliger & Shohamy, 1989). An interview with an individual can facilitate detailed,
deep inquiry while participants in group interviews can often stimulate each other to give
fuller accounts or other memories (Hopkins, 2002) and take the interview in unexpected
directions, although they might also take the opportunity to try to impress, exaggerate or
dominate other participants meaning some data might be distorted. In this case, the
interviewer would have to make a decision about whether or not it should be included.
Interviews can also be structured, with a series of predetermined questions or a
verbally administered questionnaire (Richards, 2003), open, or unstructured, with
questions arising from and during the discussion, or semi-structured, a combination of
the two (Brown & Rodgers, 2002; Dörnyei, 2007; Hopkins, 2002; Nunan, 1992) which
would enable interviewers to follow a schedule or guide, and ask the same questions to
different interviewees whilst retaining the flexibility to pursue lines of inquiry particular
to the individual.
Richards (2003) suggests that interviewers may use a range of questions types.
These include an opening question, possibly drawing a “fairly lengthy response…
[which] provides a springboard for further questions” (p. 56), checking, reflecting,
refining and follow-up questions, probing questions offering either a “direct invitation to
add more detail or… directed questions” (p. 56), event questions that “elicit chronologies,
relationships, reactions…, perspective questions that invite explanation and
interpretation” (p. 56) and structuring questions such as ‘can we move on?’ (p. 56). The
question-types chosen will depend on the kind of information the interviewer is seeking
to elicit. For example, Roulston (2010) suggests that open questions in interviews, such
102
as those inviting “interviewees to tell a story…, can generate detailed descriptions” (p.
12) whilst probes “frequently use the participant's own words to generate questions that
elicit further description” (p. 13), and closed questions, those eliciting single-word
answers or offering restricted-response options can be useful for checking or clarifying
aspects of the interview, including open, unstructured ones.
To ensure an accurate record, interviews can be audio-recorded. The interviewer
might also take written notes (Nunan, 1992) in which non-verbal responses could be
recorded too. The interviewer might summarize the discussion orally at the conclusion
creating “a brief and succinct account… that can be easily transcribed” (Hopkins, 2002,
p. 109). Transcription can be a time-consuming, laborious, labour-intensive task (Elliott,
1991) and, although some transcription software is available, a researcher using
interviews may need to invest many hours in transcribing them. Transcripts, however,
can be used to check both content and comprehension and shown to the interviewee as
part of an authentication process.
Finally, Foddy (1993) suggests qualitative interviews may be used for the
following reasons:
“• interviewees’ answers are deemed to be more valid if they do not know why
the interviewer has asked the question, and if possible responses have not been
suggested by the interviewer;
• the research context does not influence the production of the data, and the
process of answering questions does not change participants’ beliefs, opinions,
and habits;
• the data produced from this kind of interview can then be meaningfully
compared with that derived from other” (cited in Roulston, 2010, p. 52).
The interviews conducted for this study followed those guidelines, asking the same
questions in the same order to different interviewees to enable meaningful comparison of
data as well as to minimize the possibility of the researcher influencing responses.
“The interview,” states Rapley, “is an economical means, in the sense of time and
money, of getting access to a topic” (2001, p. 317). It can be a useful method of exploring
issues raised by other data collection tools, by other respondents and by the literature, and
provide a less structured, more immediate forum for reflecting on experience than is
available to questionnaire respondents. Consequently, this study used interviews to
generate both qualitative and quantitative data and to explore issues raised in the
questionnaires as well as in the literature. These interviews are described in 4.6.2 below.
103
4.3.4 Summary
The data used in this thesis was collected through a combination of questionnaire and
interview because it was felt that this combination might facilitate an integration of
qualitative and quantitative data which might, in turn, allow a fuller consideration of the
phenomenon under investigation, in this instance teachers’ experience of working with
Young Learners. It sits in a phenomenological tradition because it aims to describe human
experience and construct knowledge of teaching English as a foreign language to Young
Learners from that experience. It also followed a broadly neo-positivist approach in that
it aimed to be neutral and unbiased, generating valid, credible data with minimal
researcher influence or input, with data coded, categorized and standardized (Roulston,
2010).
Consequently a draft questionnaire was designed for a small pilot of 2, then a
wider pilot with a larger group of 41 teachers from a range of countries. Their returns
were coded and the questionnaire revised using categories and items suggested by the
pilot sample. This was then distributed electronically as a Google Form and yielded 139
responses. The questionnaire asked teachers to reflect on their experiences of training and
development, on past, present and future aspects of their career and for some
consideration of the challenges they faced, some reflection on how these were overcome
and some evaluation of the training and support provided. Finally, face-to-face interviews
with 16 teachers supplemented, developed and authenticated the questionnaire data
through response-convergence. The samples are described in detail in Section 4.5 below.
4.4 Ethical issues
Some research can generate personal data that might enable participant identification
(Dörnyei, 2007). In such instances, the researcher needs to decide how much of this
should be disclosed in a report or thesis and also seek informed consent for its use. By
agreeing to provide data, one might argue that the participant has given implicit consent
to its use. However, it is now necessary to secure explicit consent, with participants made
aware of the purpose of the research and the thesis, how their data will be used and stored,
who will have access to it and what will happen to it on project completion (Thomas,
2009; Wallace, 1998). Participants need to make an active choice to take part, opting into
the research by signing a form or a data-release document (Thomas, 2009). However, as
he also indicates, “because only really willing people opt in,” all samples now become
self-selected (ibid., p. 151) and all sample members self-selecting since “the individual’s
freedom to decline participation must be respected” (Seliger & Shohamy, 1989, p. 196).
104
Respondent-anonymity seems an essential component of ethical research
(Dörnyei, 2002; Elliot, 1991; Seliger & Shohamy, 1989; Thomas, 2009; Wallace, 1998).
Thus, in accordance with university regulations, an Ethical Issues Audit was completed
and submitted to the ethics committee, who granted approval for this research to be
carried out. An informed consent form was subsequently developed. As both Thomas
(2009) and Wallace (1998) suggest, this explained the purpose of the research, that it was
for a PhD degree, described how the data would be coded, stored and accessed, and by
whom, and stated that neither respondents nor the institutions they worked for would be
identified. There was a space for respondents to sign to show they had read the form,
understood its contents and gave permission for the data to be used in the thesis and,
potentially, in conference presentations or other publications. Because this research was
gathering data directly from adults as private individuals third parties were not involved.
The form acted as the questionnaire’s cover-page. Respondents were asked to type their
name and the date in the appropriate space to indicate their consent, and to indicate, as
item 38 on the questionnaire, that they gave permission for their data to be used in a PhD
thesis. As a way of concealing respondent-identity, no names were used. The
questionnaires were shuffled into a random sequence and then numbered, individual
respondents being identified for the purpose of citation as R (Respondent) + number.
Names were deleted although a key was kept in the researcher’s notebook in case the
respondent needed to be contacted again. Similarly, the names of employing institutions
were deleted from the questionnaires.
For the interviews, informed consent forms were printed and photocopied so they
could be physically signed at the interview’s outset. These stated the purpose of the
interview, the type of information it was designed to collect, how it would be used and
stored, and where it would be stored, how it would be processed, who would be able to
access it and how interviewees’ identities would be concealed and anonymized. It stated
that written summaries of the interviews would be made available for comment, checking,
verification and validation and asked interviewees for a signature giving their permission
for the data to be used in the thesis. Following Seliger and Shohamy (1989), it was made
clear to interviewees that they could refuse to answer any question and/or withdraw from
the interview at any time. Members of the sample were identified as T (for Teacher) +
number. In the transcripts, their names and the names of their employers were omitted.
Copies of both informed consent forms appear in Appendix 1.
The data was stored in password-protected folders on one laptop computer and
backed up on a memory stick. This seemed more secure than a data-cloud or a public-
105
access computer in the university. All printing was done at the researcher’s house. In
addition, all email communication with research participants was done from a secure
university email account and grouped into a folder on the researcher’s laptop computer.
Hard copies of questionnaires were kept in binders in the researcher’s house. Interview
transcripts were similarly stored. The interview recordings were copied from the voice-
recorder to a password-protected folder on the researcher’s personal computer and deleted
from the recorder. These, and the emails and questionnaires, will be deleted from the
computer when this PhD is finished.
4.5 Sampling
Just as there are several possible methods of collecting data, so there are several methods
of determining who should be approached to contribute that data. It may not be possible
to collect data from every member of a particular group, in this case every single teacher
of English as a foreign language to young learners, so the researcher needs to make a
principled selection from that population, a sample that reflects and represents the greater
whole. These will be people who have experienced the phenomenon under investigation
(Richards, 2003). This section describes how this researcher identified and engaged such
people and how the three main samples emerged.
4.5.1 Sampling methods
For this research, a combination of sampling methods was used. This can result in a richer,
more diverse sample than cluster sampling, for example, which involves selecting a group
from within the same institution. Research by, among others, Beddall (2013), Golombek
(1998), Johnston (1997) and Tsui (2003), uses cluster sampling, in that all their research
participants worked in the same school and had a shared context, potentially limiting their
perspectives and insights. This researcher wanted a greater diversity of occupational
contexts so chose not employ this sampling method.
One advantage of using a globally diverse sample is that members of that sample
can describe a range and variety of contexts and experiences and allow the researcher to
view issues from different perspectives and traditions. A disadvantage lies in securing
sufficient numbers of people if emails, Internet discussion boards and personal contacts
are the main distribution channels. A random element may be introduced even to the most
purposive sampling plan as a result.
Random sampling involves a group of participants being selected at random from
the population. However, no sample can be truly random since, as soon as someone agrees
106
to participate, they become self-selected although they may have been randomly chosen
initially. Self-selected samples reflect the motivation and interest-levels of the participants
but there is a “good chance that the resulting sample will not be similar to the target
population” (Dörnyei, 2007, pp. 100-101) because the people who choose to participate
may have an interest in the topic which may not exist in the population as a whole. Such
participants may have a personal agenda or grievances to air and consequently the data
can reflect opinions, biases and personal attitudes. In an attempt to minimize the potential
impact of bias, data gathered from self-selected samples can be tested against other
samples or the literature, or compared against data gathered from other locations and
contexts. Nonetheless, perhaps, in qualitative research, bias (or subjectivity) may be
exactly what the researcher is seeking to explore.
Snowball sampling involves a ‘chain reaction’ where the “researcher identifies a
few people who meet the criteria of the particular study and then asks [them] to identify
further appropriate members of the population” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 98). Such samples
“draw on the knowledge of informants as one contact leads to another” (Richards, 2003,
p. 250), often without the direct involvement of the researcher. Thus the sample consists
partly of participants identified and selected by other participants. This saves the
researcher having to locate and contact lots of people but it does remove the constitution
of the sample from his control. It can, however, introduce a random element into the
sample. In this research, for example, the questionnaires were snowballed within
organizations to reach parts of the world the researcher did not anticipate. This helped
generate a richer, more diverse sample and, although a single response from Slovenia
might not be representative of teachers of English as a foreign language to Young
Learners in Slovenia generally, it was exciting to receive such unexpected contributions.
In addition, this teacher’s experiences may resonate with another’s and become
representative.
Using the Internet to compile a sample allows the possibility of a truly global
spread. However, there are some disadvantages, particularly if “it is not possible to apply
any systematic, purposive sampling strategy” to the Internet (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 122), or,
for that matter, to snowball sampling more generally. The researcher sends the
questionnaire to “various Internet discussion groups, bulletin boards and lists and/or
initiate[s] some sort of snowball sampling by emailing potential participants and then
hope[s] for a sizeable sample” (ibid., p. 122). Too much appears left to chance. The
number of responses is unpredictable and beyond the control of the researcher. With the
Internet, a random sample becomes self-selecting, introducing potential volunteer bias
107
and possibly limiting the generalizability of the research since the sample cannot really
be viewed as representative of anything other than itself. Ways of balancing this might be
to conduct a non-web-based survey to compare results or use another method to
investigate issues arising from the questionnaires, in this case interviews.
This researcher also used unplanned opportunistic sampling, described by
Richards (2003) as “taking advantage of opportunities in order to identify best cases” (p.
250). Potential participants were encountered at conferences, on training courses and
within staff rooms where the researcher was working, and invited to join the sample. This
was a random process to an extent, because the researcher did not plan to meet these
people, but also self-selecting because they chose to accept the invitation. All the
members of the sample met the pre-determined selection criteria (criterion sampling) and
had the common, shared experience of having taught English as a foreign language to
Young Learners in foreign contexts (homogenous sampling). However, because the
sample itself was not pre-determined, sampling became “a flexible, ongoing, evolving
process of selecting successive respondents” (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, in Dörnyei, 2007,
p. 257). This has the advantage of enabling continual data authentication and refinement
by sharing initial findings with the next, new sample. With a rolling sample, one can test
the feasibility of new ideas, “fill gaps, expand or even challenge” earlier findings (ibid.,
p. 126) and investigate their impact whilst continuing to gather primary data.
4.5.2 Location, contexts, sizes and characteristics of samples used in this research
Dörnyei (2007) says “we can never examine all the people whose answers would be
relevant… and therefore… the final picture unfolding in our research will always be a
function of those whom we have selected to obtain our data from” (p. 27). Results could,
perhaps, reflect the nature of the sample, and be influenced or even predetermined not
only by the size and quality of the research group but also by the beliefs and values of the
group members. This might be minimized if sample members are selected from an initial
scoping survey using a sampling plan identifying people to answer the research questions
(ibid.). Consequently, a pilot study was conducted, partly for this purpose as well as to
test and refine the instrument itself.
The pilot sample consisted of former colleagues, contacts made at conferences
and teachers snowballed the questionnaire by other respondents. Mostly teachers of
English as a foreign language to Young Learners in private language centres, they were
from a range of nationalities and included both native and non-native English speakers.
The sample was spread over 26 countries (see Table 3 below). This was not planned but
108
occurred randomly through email and social media, thus demonstrating both the
advantages (global reach) and disadvantages (reliance on others) of Internet-distributed
questionnaires.
Number of
respondents
per country
Country from which they responded
4 Spain.
3 France, Hong Kong, Russia.
2 Czech Republic, Italy, Qatar, Romania, Saudi
Arabia, UK.
1 Belarus, Brunei, Colombia, Cyprus, Greece,
Indonesia, Malaysia, Poland, Singapore, Slovenia,
Sri Lanka, Switzerland, the UAE, Ukraine, the
USA and Vietnam.
Table 3: Geographical distribution of pilot sample.
The demographic characteristics of the sample is given in Table 4 below:
Respondents’
gender
Age range of respondents
M =11
F = 30
TOTAL = 41
20-29 = 9
30-39 = 18
40-49 = 10
50-59 = 4
TOTAL = 41
Table 4: Characteristics of pilot sample.
10 self-identified as Non-native English Speaker Teachers (NNESTs). 12 had
done pre-service training in teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners,
meaning 29 teachers, or 71 per cent, had not done any.
This seems to confirm the initial hypothesis that the majority of people teaching
English to Young Learners have had no training in how to do this, although they have
probably been trained in how to teach English to adults. These people seem to be expected
to be able to adapt this adult-oriented training to meet the challenges of working with
young children, and to meet their particular learning and developmental needs.
The main sample was constructed from responses to the Google Form version of
the questionnaire that was distributed in September 2015 through a number of global
organizations and posted on bulletin boards and appropriate Internet discussion forums.
The total number of 139 was drawn from 39 countries, listed in Table 5 below:
109
Number of
respondents
per country
Country from which they responded
19 Spain.
14 Sri Lanka.
12 Portugal.
10 Italy.
9 France.
7 Taiwan.
6 (x2 = 12) China, Vietnam.
4 Venezuela.
3 (x5 =15) Egypt, India, Malaysia, Romania, Thailand.
2 (x10 = 20) Bahrain, Indonesia, Kuwait, Mexico, Palestine, Saudi Arabia,
South Korea, Switzerland, UK, Uruguay.
1 (x15 = 15) Brazil, Colombia, Croatia, Hong Kong, Iran, Japan,
Kazakhstan, Libya, Morocco, Russia, Slovakia, Sudan,
Tanzania, Tunisia, Ukraine.
2 Not given
Table 5: Geographical distribution of questionnaire sample.
This distribution, with a majority in Western Europe and Spain, may be a reasonable
reflection of the global market for English language tuition for Young Learners and tends
to reveal where the larger global networks traditionally have the highest concentrations
of their centres. For example, in Spain in 2014 the British Council had 17 (British Council,
2014a) with 80 teachers in their Madrid Young Learner centre, whilst International House
had 24 (International House, 2014). These significantly outnumber their centres in other
countries. In addition, some of these countries, notably Bahrain, Colombia, China, Czech
Republic, Egypt, Sri Lanka and Taiwan, appear to have high numbers of primary-age
learners in private language centres (Rixon, 2000, 2013). Finally, it seems to reflect the
geographical distribution of the pilot sample, which also had Spain at the top of the table.
The demographic characteristics of the questionnaire sample are given in Table 6:
Gender of respondents Age-range of respondents Career stage of
respondents
M = 59 (42%)
F = 80 (58%)
TOTAL = 139 (100%)
20-29 = 11 (8%)
30-39 = 59 (42%)
40-49 = 41 (29%)
50-59 = 21 (15%)
60+ = 7 (5%)
TOTAL = 139 (100%)
0-5 years = 9 (6%)
5-10 years = 30 (22%)
10-15 years = 47 (34%)
15+ years = 53 (38%)
TOTAL = 139 (100%)
Table 6: Characteristics of questionnaire sample.
110
This information was gathered from Items 33, 34 and 1 of the questionnaire. Item 35
yielded the information that, of this sample, 128 of the 139 considered themselves native
speakers of English (92 per cent), with 10 (7 per cent) identifying as non-native English
speakers and 1 indicating s/he did not know. Finally, members of the sample held the
following qualifications (item 36):
Qualification Number who hold it
CELTA/Trinity Cert. 119 (86%)
YL certificate such as
CELTYL/IHCYL/TYLEC
62 (45%)
DELTA/Trinity Dip. 98 (71%)
Master’s degree
(MA, MSc)
63 (45%)
PGCE 16 (11%)
Others 34 (25%)
Table 7: Qualifications of questionnaire sample.
In addition, item 7 indicated that 87 per cent of the questionnaire sample worked for large,
global, United Kingdom-based providers of English Language Teaching such as British
Council or International House rather than smaller, local private centres, although most
had done so in the early stages of their careers, usually immediately post-Cambridge or
Trinity College Certificate and in some cases even without this basic training, for some
of these small centres require native speakers first, and qualified teachers second.
For the interviews, a sample of 16 teachers was compiled during summer 2013
(8) and summer 2015 (8). The sample was opportunistically constructed from the
researcher’s work colleagues and house-mates in a university because they were easy to
access. Some had become permanent teachers of English for Academic Purposes (EAP)
whilst others were returning to teaching English to Young Learners when the summer
school had finished. All the interviewees had taught English as a foreign language to
Young Learners outside their own, individual home countries and were able to articulate
and reflect upon their experiences as Richards (2003) suggests. The interviews were
designed to explore issues and authenticate data arising from both the questionnaire and
the literature and allowed the comparison of international contexts and perspectives. 7
interviewees had taught English to Young Learners in Spain, 9 in Asia (3 in Japan and 4
in South Korea), and 4 in North Africa (Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia). One had worked
in 11 countries. 15 were British, 1 Spanish. The gender mix and age-range of the sample
appears in Table 8 below:
111
Respondents’
gender
Age-range of
respondents
Career stage of
respondents
M = 10 (62%)
F = 6 (38%)
TOTAL = 16
20-29 = 1 (6%)
30-39 = 7 (44%)
40-49 = 5 (31%)
50-59 = 3 (19%)
TOTAL = 16
0-5 years = 0
5-10 years = 2 (12%)
10-15 years = 4 (25%)
15-20 years = 10 (63%)
TOTAL = 16
Table 8: Characteristics of interview sample.
In a large sample, the impact of individual variables can be reduced. In qualitative
studies, where the individual variables are the focus of interest (Cohen, et al., 2007;
Dörnyei, 2007; Seliger & Shohamy, 1989), smaller samples might be preferred so that
individual voices can be better highlighted. Quantitative studies may require larger
numbers so findings can be generalized but sample size seems to depend on the type of
research being undertaken. These samples, of 139 for the questionnaire and 16 for the
interviews (Richards, 2003, recommends between 10 and 20 for this kind of research),
seemed large enough to generate descriptive statistics, identify general trends and answer
the research questions whilst being small enough to allow scrutiny of individual stories.
In addition, the questionnaire data seemed to become saturated, with new data simply
repeating existing data, around the 40 to 50 mark. The characteristics of the total sample
of 155 are shown below in Table 9 below:
Gender of
respondents
Age-bands of
respondents
Career stages of
respondents
M = 69 (45%)
F = 86 (55%)
TOTAL = 155
20-29 = 12 (8%)
30-39 = 66 (43%)
40-49 = 46 (30%)
50-59 = 24 (15%)
60-69 = 7 (5%)
TOTAL = 155
0-5 years = 9 (6%)
5-10 years = 32 (21%)
10-15 years = 51 (33%)
15+ years = 63 (41%)
TOTAL = 155
Table 9: Demographic characteristics of total research sample.
If the sample is representative of teachers of English as a foreign language to Young
Learners in private language centres, it suggests that, in summary, two-thirds of teachers
are female, with just over half under the age of 40 but a majority between 30 and 50. In
addition, two-thirds of the sample have more than a decade’s experience of teaching
English to Young Learners so may be able to offer insights drawn a range of contexts and
situations. It is, however, difficult to establish whether this is fully representative of such
a widespread and globally diverse occupation as teaching English as a foreign language,
112
particularly since the majority of the sample work for large global networks rather than
small, locally run language schools (item 7). Perhaps individual readers might compare
this sample with the demographic composition of their own centre.
4.6 Data collection instruments and procedure
This section details the development of the data collection instruments used in this study
and the data collection process itself, including the piloting of the questionnaire and its
subsequent revision and distribution, and the conduct of the interviews.
4.6.1 The questionnaire
The purpose of the research questionnaire was to acquire detailed, reflective and
personalized accounts of private sector Young Learner teachers’ training and
development experiences. Since this was intended as the main data collection instrument,
it was designed to be comprehensive and wide-ranging and to gather as much information
as possible into one document. Initially developed between January and March 2013, it
contained a mix of item-types, with some closed, some open and some multiple-choice
items constructed from a list of 52 potential items drawn from the literature review, the
research questions and the assumptions about teachers of English as a foreign language
to Young Learners that underpin this study.
This draft questionnaire was informally piloted with two postgraduate students in
the researcher’s university department. Both students had taught English to Young
Learners in private language centres outside their home countries, in this case the United
Kingdom. One had taught as a volunteer teacher in Peru and the other for mainstream,
global English Language Teaching providers in Italy, Egypt, and China. In addition,
because they too were devising data collection instruments, they were able to offer advice
and insights based on their own experience of questionnaire design. Consequently, some
items were reworded or deleted according to whether they would yield answers to the
research questions and the total number reduced to 40. Some draft items made unfounded
assumptions. For example, one question asked “What, from your pre-service training, did
you find useful in the Young Learner classroom?” This pre-supposed that there had been
some pre-service training whilst also assuming some of it had been useful. In addition,
“Some say that teachers take a learner-centred approach with adults and a teacher-fronted
approach with Young Learners. How do you differentiate between teaching Young
Learners and teaching adults?” seemed to require a level of awareness teachers might not
have. Two others, asking how teachers felt their pre-service training had prepared them
113
for teaching English to Young Learners and how pre-service training aimed directly at
teaching English to Young Learners might have helped were removed as potentially
leading questions. A further change was made to the self-describing career stage item
since it relied on self-definition. It was replaced with a simple question about the
beginning of an individual’s journey as an English Language teacher.
The informal pilot study successfully revealed how the respondents felt about
teaching English to Young Learners, with pre-trained S1 saying it was “fun at first” and
untrained S2 that he was “slightly nervous and unsure what to do.” Later, as he became
more experienced, S1 noted it became “less fun when you [had] to teach rather than just
entertain.” S2 said he “became more confident” as he got to know the children better.
These remarks were central to the issues the research aimed to explore.
The next version of the questionnaire contained 40 items in five sections. Section
headings were written in blue capital letters and underlined to demarcate sections.
Instructions for answering questions were given in blue and italicized. Items were written
in black with question numbers bolded for highlight. Expandable boxes were provided
in which respondents’ could their write answers. Selections from multiple-choice items
were to be circled, highlighted or underlined, and this was explained in the rubric. The
researcher’s contact email and address were given in the introductory statement, which
outlined the purpose of the research. The questionnaire was written in Times New Roman
12 pt. and with a 1.5 line-spacing. This was so it would, if printed, fit onto six A4 pages
in Portrait orientation. A copy of this first questionnaire appears in Appendix 2.
It was emailed as a Word Document attachment to personal contacts, employers
and language centres, and snowballed through a number of organizations. 41 were
returned. The data was analyzed, both to test the coding and categorization processes and
to ensure that it was the type of data required to answer the research questions. In the light
of this pilot, the questionnaire was revised so it was easier and quicker to complete. It was
also redeveloped into an electronic, online document using Google Forms since the
process of downloading, completing, uploading and emailing the original Word
Document felt clumsy and cumbersome and may have been a factor in dissuading
potential respondents from contributing.
A number of open-response items were replaced with multiple-choice tick-lists,
with items suggested by the pilot sample. This was an attempt to make the process quicker
and more efficient for the user, with the amount of actual writing being reduced. Items
that yielded unhelpful, confusing or inconclusive data such as Items 11 and 15 were
deleted. The introductory statement of intent and the indication of consent for the use of
114
the data in a PhD thesis were removed, the first appearing in the email invitation, the
second being converted into a tick-box item at the end of the form. Finally, a financial
incentive, in the form of a £5 Amazon voucher, was offered to encourage responses.
The final electronic version of the questionnaire, found in Appendix 3, contained
38 items and was divided into four sections. The first, Section A, Working in English
Language Teaching, asked respondents about their entry into the industry and their basic
training. It contained 12 items, including multiple-choice and open-response items. Item
1 asked when the respondent began teaching English as a Foreign Language and required
the selection of one of four time-periods (0-5 years, 5-10 years, 10-15 years or 15+ years).
Item 2 asked what they had done before teaching English as a Foreign Language and Item
3 asked why they had become teachers, both items requiring respondents to select from a
list. Item 4 asked if they had done a pre-service training course such as the Cambridge
Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA) or the Trinity College
certificate and was a yes/no answer. Items 5 and 6 required respondents to write simple,
single-word answers indicating where their first teaching job had been and where they
were working now, at the time of completing the questionnaire. Item 7 asked if
respondents worked for a large, globally present provider of tuition in English as a
Foreign Language such as British Council or International House and required a yes/no
answer whilst Item 8 asked respondents to indicate from a list of options which age-
groups they had taught because the literature and the pilot study had suggested private
centres might not practice a traditional primary/secondary structure, and may therefore
expect their teachers to work with both.
Exploring private language centre practices more fully, the next four items, 9, 10,
11 and 12, focused on the relationship between the language centre and the host country
by asking about the course materials used (produced in the United Kingdom, the United
States, Canada or Australasia, or locally produced in the host country), who designed the
syllabus and assessment system and whether these were aligned to the host country’s
educational system or not. The purpose of these items was to establish that the language
centres were relevant to the research and to indicate the level of autonomy these centres
enjoyed within the operational framework established by their United Kingdom or United
States-based head offices and by their host countries. These items were limited-option
multiple-choice questions.
Section B, Working with Young Learners, comprised 11 items asking respondents
to reflect on their early teaching experiences of teaching English as a foreign language to
Young Learners. It included closed and open-response questions, multiple-choice items
115
and boxes for written comments and aimed to discover more about the training and first-
year support received. Item 13 asked where respondents had first taught English to Young
Learners. This could be cross-checked with the answers to Item 5 as a way of establishing
how many respondents had taught Young Learners in their first English Language
Teaching job. Item 14 asked whether any pre-service training course for teaching English
to Young Learners had been done, and if so, what it had been. This again required
respondents to select one from a limited list of choices, since the research was only
interested in relevant, industry-recognized courses such as Young Learner extension to
the Cambridge Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA) or the
internal, in-house training offered by the British Council, the Trinity Young Learner
English Certificate (TYLEC), and International House, the International House
Certificate in Young Learners (IHCYL). Item 15 pursued this theme by asking
respondents about the type of support they had received from their centre in that first post.
Eight suggestions, drawn from the literature, the pilot and the experience of the
researcher, were listed and respondents asked to indicate through a yes/no choice which
they had received. This seemed more efficient and easily quantifiable than asking
respondents to write an account.
Items 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 asked respondents to reflect on how prepared they
had felt for teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners, how enjoyable
their early experiences of doing this had been, how they felt about it then and now, and
to what they attributed any change, more training, more experience and/or more
knowledge of how Young Learners learn. Items 16 and 17 were based on Likert scales
whilst 18, 19 and 20 were rating-scale questions.
Item 21 asked respondents to rate a number of challenges common to teaching
English as a foreign language to Young Learners, especially in a foreign language context.
The list of eight was generated by members of to the pilot sample and by the literature on
teaching English language to Young Learners and included behaviour management,
motivating Young Learners, teaching a wide range of ages and identifying appropriate
learning activities and materials. Respondents were asked to consider how challenging
each aspect might be to a newly qualified, inexperienced teacher using a three-point scale
of ‘very, quite or not very’ challenging. This item was designed to discover what teachers
themselves thought, and whether that concurred with the literature and the research in this
area. It would also help to answer Research Question One, which focused on the
challenges of teaching English to Young Learners in private language centres in
international contexts such as those experienced by members of the sample.
116
Item 22 followed on from this by asking respondents, through a yes/no question,
whether they thought a module on teaching English as a foreign language to Young
Learners should be added to basic training courses like the Cambridge CELTA or Trinity
College certificate, and item 23 asked them to suggest the possible content of such a
module by writing their ideas in a box.
Section C, Teacher training and development, focused on the activities and
opportunities respondents had been offered or had undertaken. It contained 9 items. The
first, item 24, asked teachers to indicate what type of teacher development activity they
had found most rewarding or stimulating, and supplied a list of 6, including in-service
education and training programmes, formalized training courses such as the Cambridge
Diploma and academic study such as Master’s degrees in Teaching English to Speakers
of Other Languages, Education or Applied Linguistics. Respondents were asked to select
one. The list was constructed from suggestions made by members of the pilot sample and
from the literature discussed in Chapter Three above. Item 25 expanded the list to 8 and
asked respondents to indicate which activities were provided by their current centres.
They could choose as many as they thought were directly applicable to their own
situations and histories.
The purpose of this item was to discover the range and variety of in-service
teacher development opportunities and identify whether these were, in fact, what teachers
wanted. This was addressed by item 26 which presented respondents with 8 possible
developmental activities such as starting a new job, talking to colleagues and reading
books or journals. Respondents were asked to rate each activity on a 4-point Likert scale
of very useful, quite useful, not very useful or not at all useful. The aim of a rating system
was to try to identify a quantifiable consensus across the sample of the most and least
valued activity.
Item 27, based on comments made by the pilot sample, asked respondents what
they valued most in an in-service training workshop. Suggestions, also drawn from
comments made by the pilot sample, included practical ideas, techniques and tips,
discussion of theories, teachers’ needs and an interesting range of participants and/or
workshop leaders. Respondents had to select one of these choices. Again, the purpose
was to infer what practising classroom teachers want most from an in-service training
workshop, whilst the next two items, 28 and 29, were limited to yes/no choices, and asked
if respondents had job plans or probationary periods. The purpose of these items was to
discover what kind of formal teacher development systems existed within the
respondent’s centre at an institutional level.
117
The next three items investigated career pathways and aspirations. Item 30 asked
respondents to indicate the different roles and responsibilities they had undertaken during
their career to date. 7 roles, as suggested by the pilot study, the literature and the
researcher’s experience, were listed and included writing materials, designing courses,
training teachers and managing processes. Item 31 returned to the theme of training and
support, asking respondents what kind of training or support they had been offered in
preparation for these roles and exploring how far Young Learner English Language
teachers are promoted into roles of enhanced responsibility with only classroom
experience to inform their decision-making. The options included formal training, being
mentored, getting a reduced teaching load and reading about it themselves. Finally, in
order to learn something about respondents’ aspirations and ambitions, item 32 asked
them what they hoped to do next in teaching English as a Foreign Language by selecting
one possibility from a list of 10. These included moving to a new country, pursuing more
qualifications and leaving the English Language Teaching industry altogether. The list
was based on responses to the pilot study.
The final section, D, About You, consisted of 6 items, including 4 ‘tick-box’ items
on gender, age-band, qualifications and self-identification as native speaker or not (items
33, 34, 35, 36), the latter because the experiences, attitudes and aspirations of non-native
English speaker teachers might differ from those of native speaker teachers. These were
to provide demographic information about the sample’s members. In retrospect, a
question on whether respondents were globally mobile or locally static might have also
been useful because those experiences, attitudes and aspirations might also differ.
Item 37 was a sentence-completion task designed to summarize respondents’
attitudes. On the pilot study, respondents were asked to add fewer than five words to the
sentence-stem “Teaching YLs is…” These were coded, categorized and grouped, and
presented on the questionnaire as a limited list of 8 choices, including ‘rewarding’,
‘boring’, ‘positively challenging’ and ‘negatively challenging’. Item 38 was a
dichotomous question with a yes/no choice indicating consent for the data to be used in a
PhD thesis. The questionnaire concluded with a thank-you note and an invitation to enter
an email address to which the voucher would be sent when the data had been processed.
In summary, the questionnaire adopted a varied approach, providing respondents
with a mix of different question-types to maintain interest and to elicit different types of
information, from simple facts to opinions and feelings. There was a clear and consistent
format, in a consistent and commonly used font and font-size, with simple,
straightforward instructions demarcated from questions in different colours and scripts.
118
The pilot data collection exercise led to the refinement of the original instrument. It helped
identify gaps and missing questions, evaluate internal-respondent consistency and
eliminate ambiguities and unanswered or irrelevant items (Brown & Rodgers, 2002;
Dörnyei, 2007; Hopkins, 2002; Nunan, 1992), and helped shape the final Google Form
version. This was embedded as a hyperlink in an email. Recipients clicking on it were
taken directly to the questionnaire. Their responses were recorded automatically and
returned to the researcher with no need for correspondence, downloading or saving of
documents.
4.6.2 The interviews
The purpose of the interviews was to explore some of the issues raised in the
questionnaires in more depth. Eight people were interviewed in August 2013 and a further
eight in July and August 2015. The first set were recorded on a digital voice-recorder,
fully transcribed and typed as Word Documents. In addition, hand-written notes were
made during the interview on a typed document with spaces between each question for
the notes on two sides of A4 paper. They were then typed up and emailed to the
interviewees for confirmation of their accuracy. The second set were neither recorded nor
transcribed but notated by hand.
A semi-structured format was adopted, with a warm-up question, and the research
questions forming a framework to guide and organize the interview (Richards, 2003). To
ensure consistency across the sample, the credibility of the interviews and the integrity of
the data, all the interviewees were asked the same items in the same sequence (Roulston,
2010) so that researcher bias might be minimized. However, within the neo-positivist
approach, interviewees were allowed to go off-topic or develop their responses where
they wanted to. The time allocated for each interview was therefore flexible.
An interview guide comprising 10 questions was developed from the research
questions, the literature and the questionnaire and a sample copy can be found in
Appendix 4. Item 1 blended the first section of the questionnaire into two questions, the
first asking why and when interviewees had become teachers of English as a Foreign
Language and for a summary of the career pathway to date. As with the questionnaires,
this information helped contextualize the remaining responses and explore the notion that
teaching English as a Foreign Language is not, for some, a first-choice or first career, but
a lifestyle-choice to facilitate global mobility.
Items 2, 3 and 4 asked directly about the challenges of teaching English as a
Foreign Language generally and of teaching this to Young Learners in particular
119
(Research Question One) and for an account of their first Young Learner class. This might
add descriptive detail to Items 15 and 16 on the questionnaire through anecdotes
illustrating these challenges.
Items 5, 6 and 7 focused on Research Question Two, training and occupational
development, asking about the pre-service training (Item 5) and subsequent in-service
support and development (Item 7). Items 8, 9 and 10 asked how interviewees felt about
teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners and how committed they were
to staying in the English Language Teaching industry more generally.
The interview guide was piloted informally in July 2013 with two colleagues who
had both taught English as a foreign language to Young Learners but felt they had
insufficient experience to contribute much to the research. These colleagues helped shape
the direction of the interview, allowed an estimation of the time each interview might take
and provided opportunities to practise using the voice-recorder. Each interview began
with a brief introduction and explanation of the procedure, and the signing of the Informed
Consent form. Hand-written notes were made as interviewees answered the questions.
Occasionally clarification or further explanation was sought. Interviews were terminated
when enough information to answer the research questions had been gathered. Each
interview lasted between 30 and 45 minutes and were single-participant, except T6 and
T7 who opted to come together. That interview lasted nearly an hour. Interviews took
place in a variety of venues, but mostly at lunchtime in a classroom at the university,
although some interviewees preferred the café, the garden or the hall of residence kitchen.
4.7 Data analysis methods and procedures
Richards (2003) defines data analysis as identifying relationships between data,
suggesting three aspects, namely description, or stating what is happening, analysis, or
why something is happening, and interpretation, or what it means. Miles and Huberman
(1994) identify three stages of data analysis and interpretation. The first, data reduction,
requires the researcher to “select, focus, simplify or transform raw data (from) written…
notes leading to summarizing, coding, partitioning and clustering emergent themes” (p.
21). The second stage, data display, requires organizing the data into tables or graphs so
it can be presented in a coherent and accessible form. The third stage, conclusion, sees
the researcher “note regularities, patterns, explanations, possible configurations, causal
flows and propositions” (pp. 21-22, in Hopkins, 2002, p. 139) as well as irregularities and
inconsistencies. This study followed those stages.
The electronic questionnaires were calculated automatically by Google and
120
presented in Google-generated spreadsheets and charts. The pilot Word Document
questionnaires, however, were downloaded into password-protected folders on the laptop
and printed as hard copies. To preserve respondent-anonymity, the papers were shuffled
then numbered sequentially from 1 to 41 with the prefix P for Pilot. A key of names and
emails was kept in the researcher’s notebook. The electronic version was easier, quicker
and maintained respondent anonymity because the computer reported only the totals in
numbers.
The hand-written notes of each interview were typed into question-by-question
summaries and printed as hard copies. The first set of interviews were then transcribed at
the rate of approximately 5 hours per 20 minutes and some 60 hours in total (although the
last eight minutes of the interview with T6 and T7 was not relevant to this research and
therefore not transcribed). Transcripts were then ‘cleaned’ in order to remove ‘ums,’
‘errs,’ ‘I mean,’ ‘you know’ and other conversational lubricants, because the actual
communication of data was neither the focus of interest nor the purpose of these
interviews. Similarly, items that were unclear were either deleted, if they were irrelevant
to the research questions, or noted in the transcript as [INDISTINCT]. Interviewees were
labelled T (for Teacher) + number. This cleaning process was done because the transcripts
were later emailed to the participants for checking and it felt neater and more polite to
omit the ‘ums,’ ‘errs’ and ‘you knows’. They were also easier to read. The second set of
interviews were not transcribed, but analyzed for answers to the research questions.
Following this data-processing phase, documents were then analyzed for content
using a constant comparative method, “going through the data again and again,
comparing each element – phrase, sentence or paragraph… [from which] emerge…
themes that capture or summarize the contents of the data” (Thomas, 2009, p. 198). From
the themes, categories were constructed and connections established. This method was
chosen because, as Thomas says, it is a “basic analytic method of the interpretative
researcher” (ibid., p. 198), and seemed appropriate, therefore, for a phenomenological,
constructivist-interpretist approach. Data was recorded into tally-sheets hand-written on
plain A4 paper. Categories were labelled and sub-categories coded numerically.
Whilst several computer programmes such as NVivo are available to isolate and
count words in a transcript, this researcher, like Thomas, believes “there’s no substitute
for a good set of highlighters… a pen and paper, and a brain” (Thomas, 2009, p. 207). In
addition, it helped the researcher become familiar with, and close to, the data, almost to
a point of getting to know the individuals behind the numbers. This felt valuable for a
person-centred study with affective issues at the centre.
121
Data was grouped into categories using highlighter pens. For example in Item 2
on the pilot questionnaire (“what did you do before you became an English language
teacher?”), orange was used to highlight “student”, pink to show jobs, yellow to show
teaching jobs and green for anything else, in this case “home-maker.” Using this
technique, it was clear from what Thomas (2009) calls ‘eyeballing’ the data that the
answers to Item 2 fell into four groups, one green line, one yellow line, ten orange and
thirteen pink. This yielded four categories for answers to Item 2, student, job, teacher,
other. For example, using the first 27 responses to this questionnaire, the following list
emerged showing actual respondents’ numbers in each category:
1. Non-teaching job – 1,2,5,6,8,9,13,15,17,20,21,22,23,24 = 14
2. Teaching job – 19 = 1
3. Student – 3,4,7,10,11,12,14,16,18,26,27 = 11
4. Other – 25 = 1
This grouping procedure was adopted with all pilot questionnaire items so, for Item 3,
“why did you become an English language teacher?”, the same process but using yellow
for “travel,” orange for “work or live abroad,” pink for “wanting to teach,” green for
“wanted a change,” resulted in another colour-coded chart which, when ‘eyeballed,’
revealed the most common responses and thus the trends within the sample. Eventually a
series of colour-coded lists appeared over ten pages of A4 paper.
Where respondents used words to express their answers, for instance in the pilot
questionnaire items 19 (“how did you feel about teaching YLs then?”), 22 (comments on
what “Teacher development is…”) and 26 (“what makes a good INSET?”), recurring
words were highlighted, for example “relevant,” “practical,” and “needs-based.” In
addition, words were grouped into affective positives (“love it,” “enjoy it,” “felt more
fulfilled”), affective negatives (“horrible,” “more difficult,” “hate them,” “don’t enjoy it”)
and affective neutrals (“more knowledge,” “clearer ideas”) in Items 19 and 20 and
synonyms (“exhausting, tiring,” “enjoyable, rewarding”) grouped into categories for Item
40 (“Teaching YLs is…”). These groups were subsequently coded by number and
transferred to a new paper. For the actual research questionnaire, however, the researcher
was not required to go through this process since Google generated the statistics for him.
The same process was followed with the transcripts gathered from the interview
sample since “researchers using a neo-positivist conception of interviews are likely to
represent findings in the form of themes supported by extracts from interview transcripts”
(Roulston, 2010, p. 55). Key phrases related to the research questions such as “learning
on the job,”, “classroom management above everything else,” “not naturally good with
122
kids” and “going abroad and dealing with a new culture” were colour-coded using orange,
green, pink and yellow highlighter pens. The summaries were compared for recurring
phrases and repeated sentiments from which categories were generated. Notes were then
typed as Word Documents and numbers entered into tables. Transcripts were checked
against the recordings and notes for consistency and amended where necessary. They
were also emailed to interviewees.
4.8 Validity, reliability and triangulation
Wallace defines (1998) triangulation as “collecting and analysing data using more than
one method” (p. 261) whilst Elliot (1991) suggests triangulation involves examining a
hypothesis, question, situation or issue from different perspectives and identifying points
of agreement, disagreement and difference. This, as Dörnyei (2007, p. 166) writes, is
“validation through convergence.”
For a qualitative researcher, this could mean the inclusion of some quantitative
data to objectify the qualitative. Dörnyei (2007) suggests that researchers engage in
validity checks by “involv[ing] the participants in commenting on the conclusions of the
study” (p. 60), which Richards (2003) calls member validation (p. 287), whilst Hopkins
(2002) suggests researchers can “[contrast] the perceptions of one actor… against those
of other actors in the same situation” (p. 133) in order to validate data. Key findings from
the pilot questionnaire were sent to the respondents and to the British Council, and also
presented at conferences in York, Leeds, Bristol and Essex, and at an IATEFL Young
Learner conference in Cyprus in May 2014. To check the accuracy of the interviews as
well as to allow interviewees the opportunity to withdraw should they wish to, as agreed
in the informed consent form in Appendix 1, each was emailed a cleaned copy of the
transcript and a summary of the notes. Three acknowledged receipt but without feedback
or comment.
Another aspect of ensuring the credibility of the data may be through an audit trail
(Borg, 2012; Hopkins, 2002), a chain of evidence which documents and details the
research, describes and explains the methods, evaluates the data and justifies the
conclusions. This research was audited through extensive personal notes, regular
meetings with supervisors, written accounts of which were submitted to an administrator
within the department, and PowerPoint presentations of aspects of the research delivered
at five conferences. In addition, regular contact with people active in the field, at
universities in the United Kingdom, at the British Council and elsewhere, enabled
discussion and further validation of the themes and findings of this study.
123
This validation was particularly important in terms of the research questions
which sought to explore and reflect on personal experiences but generalize those
experiences where possible to resonate with the wider population of teachers of English
as a foreign language to Young Learners. Consequently the list of challenges facing those
teachers needed to be not only real in terms of the literature reviewed in Chapter Three
above but also recognizable to teachers in other contexts. Teachers themselves created
that list from the questionnaires and the list was authenticated by the interviewees and by
practitioners and conference delegates who received that information as well as in terms
of the contents of the literature. The challenges and experiences seem to resonate beyond
those organizations and beyond the actual research sample, which might suggest it is
credible. In addition, all the participants were asked the same questions, including those
16 who were interviewed face-to-face. Finally, the data was gathered over a three-year
period from a number of different sources, through a number of different channels and
from a range of countries and contexts. That it appears consistent might also support its
credibility, since the various sources seem to converge on the same issues.
4.9 Summary
This research aimed to investigate challenges involved in teaching English as a foreign
language to Young Learners in private language centres in international contexts,
particularly those where the teacher is working in a country that is not their own, and
identify and evaluate the developmental opportunities and career pathways open to such
teachers working in those contexts. Three research questions were formulated:
1. What challenges face teachers of English as a foreign language to Young Learners
in private language centres?
2. What opportunities for training and development are available to those teachers?
3. How do these opportunities help teachers meet the challenges of teaching English
as a foreign language to Young Learners?
These were based upon assumptions drawn from the literature and the experience of the
researcher of working as a teacher of English as a foreign language to Young Learners in
private language centres outside his home country (the United Kingdom) since 1997:
a. that teaching children is different from teaching adults;
b. that the continuing growth in global demand for tuition in English as a foreign
language to Young Learners requires more teachers;
c. that training in English Language teaching to Young Learners appears to be
optional, with the current most prominent pre-service courses continuing to focus
124
on preparing trainees to teach English to adults;
d. that teachers new to teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners
can lack the skills and knowledge they need to make the transition and meet the
demands of the job whilst the quality and existence of in-service development and
support is variable;
In order to answer these questions and explore those assumptions, a study of teachers’
attitudes and experiences to teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners
was devised. It seemed appropriate to adopt a phenomenological approach because the
study explored and described human experience, beliefs and feelings. A total of 155
Young Learner teachers broadly representative of the population was surveyed in a neo-
positivist blend of qualitative and quantitative methods, specifically self-reporting
questionnaires and semi-structured face-to-face interviews. All the teachers have taught
English to Young Learners in private language centres in a number of different countries.
The results of this survey were compiled and analyzed for common themes using
comparative content analysis to derive descriptive statistics and textual evidence to
construct a picture of the current situation in teaching English as a foreign language to
Young Learners. This in turn illustrates current practice and provides insight into some
of the issues whilst complementing earlier research into this area. The findings
themselves are described, analyzed and interpreted in Chapter Five and contextualized
and discussed in Chapter Six below.
125
Chapter Five
Data presentation and analysis
This chapter presents and analyzes the data yielded by 155 respondents, 139 through
questionnaires and 16 through interviews. The structure of the chapter follows that of the
questionnaire and presents data in the same sequence. Consequently, the chapter falls into
three main sections. 5.1, Working in English Language Teaching, aims to provide an
overview of teachers’ backgrounds and current working conditions based on items 1 to
12. Section 5.2, Working with Young Learners, presents data on teachers’ experiences of
teaching English as a foreign language to young learners, including any training and
support they received, and based on items 13 to 23, whilst Section 5.3, Teacher training
and development, explores aspects of training in more detail, including needs,
opportunities and preferences, and attitudes to teaching English to Young Learners, and
based on items 24 to 32 and item 37. Section 5.4 summarizes the key findings. The
demographic information about the teacher such as age, gender and identification as a
‘native speaker’ yielded by items 33, 34 and 35 in Section D, About You, and length of
service (item 1) and place of work (item 7) is not repeated in this chapter, since it was
given in the sample profile in Chapter Four (see Tables 5 to 9 in 4.5.2 above).
Statistical data from the questionnaire is presented in graphical form, as bar-
charts, pie-charts or graphs, and supported by textual evidence in the form of quotations
from interviewees or from questionnaire respondents. Sources of data are identified as
Questionnaire Sample (QS), cited individually as R (Respondent) + number, or Interview
Sample (IS), where individuals are cited as T (teacher) + number. Finally, as well as
contributing to the data categorization process and the refinement of items for the
electronic questionnaire, the pilot survey itself, consisting of 41 questionnaires which
included lengthy, detailed written comments, yielded some interesting and valuable data,
particularly in terms of their written reflections on their attitudes and experiences. Where
some of the pilot questionnaires offer additional insights, illumination, clarification or
exemplification of an issue, they are quoted and cited as P (Pilot) + number.
Where data is presented in charts using percentages, these are given along the Y-
axis and rounded to the nearest whole number. Fractions less than 0.5 rounding down and
greater than 0.5 rounding up. This is because the numbers represent individual people.
The X-axis states the categories. All figures were produced using Google Forms,
Microsoft Office Excel and Word, and a variety of chart types was used to vary the
presentation. Quotations from interviews and questionnaires are given in italics and,
126
where longer than 40 words, as indented single-spaced blocks of text in accordance with
this university’s guidelines on the presentation of theses.
5.1 Section A: Working in English Language Teaching
Item 2 of the questionnaire asked teachers what they did before they became English
Language teachers. As shown in Figure 1 below, nearly half were employed in non-
teaching jobs, for instance retail or clerical work, whilst 40% were college or university
students for whom English Language Teaching was a subsequent first job.
In the interview sample, a similar number, nearly half, had been in non-teaching
jobs such as office work, with a similar number having been college or university
students. For instance, T1 was a secretary in an office whilst T2 was an accountant and
T8 worked in publishing. T5 had done a Postgraduate Certificate in Education with the
intention of being a secondary school music teacher, but the experience of teaching in an
English secondary school discouraged her. Because she still wanted to be a teacher, she
retrained for English Language Teaching. This was a similar story for T16, who also
trained to teach in the English secondary system. Only T4 actually wanted to be an
English Language Teacher, and that was so he could leave his home country (Spain) and
travel abroad.
T6, T7 and T8, all members of the interview sample, were students. T6 “had this
terrible feeling [he] was just going to end up sitting in an office somewhere” whilst T7
“just wanted to go somewhere warm” after university in the United Kingdom. He
suggested people tended to take “any job going whether you’re qualified or not, especially
in your first year, and certainly in my case I just took whatever I could find.” He said that
41
10
47
2
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Student Teacher (but notELT)
Working (not inteaching)
Not working
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Pre-ELT occupations of sample members
Fig. 1: What respondents did before they entered ELT (item 2).
127
he later learned that most of his fellow trainees “all basically did the same thing.”
“There is,” P12 from the pilot sample observed, “A young, replaceable workforce
who want to travel-teach for a little while before getting a ‘real’ job.” This view seems
supported by data yielded by item 3 and displayed in Figure 2 below that the main motive
for a majority of people going into English Language Teaching may be the desire to travel
and live abroad. T6, in the interview sample, suggested that “you get the CELTA because
you want to travel. I think that’s why most people do it, not because they’ve got a
passionate desire to teach the English language.”
In addition, just 3 respondents to the questionnaire (2%) reported they had taken their first
English Language Teaching job in their home country (item 5) and only 5 (4%) said they
were currently based in their home country (item 6). In the interview sample, T6 “met a
couple of women on the [CELTA] course who had come back from Greece and said ‘are
there any jobs there?’ and there were so [he] went.” T8 “couldn’t find a job in Britain so
went to Madrid with a little bit of cash and then sort of hawked [his] wares and found
something fairly quickly, partly because [he] was willing to teach children.” It seems that
this kind of flexibility is highly sought by employers.
T6 and T7 both felt that Cambridge CELTA trainers should offer more advice on
getting jobs. Finding one can be a matter of luck and the quality of the language centre
can be a lottery. As a trainee, “You have no idea how to judge whether it’s going to be a
good school or not” until you get there (T7). T6 echoed this:
10
58
23
9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Reasons why sample membersbecame English Language teachers
Fig. 2: Why respondents became English Language Teachers
(item 3).
To teach English To travel/live abroad Needed a job Other
128
Some people have a really good first experience when they go abroad.
They’re lucky to get a good job… and they quite like it. It depends on
the school. If it’s a good school, then it can be a good experience.
T7, in the interview sample, felt that greater transparency and honesty were needed
throughout the industry, including on the CELTA programme, suggesting that trainers do
not make it clear that the majority of their trainees will be teaching Young Learners
whether they want to or not because that is the way the private language centre market is
moving. He said he “had no idea” till he arrived in the centre, suggesting he might not
have taken the job if he had. T8, furthermore, offered the same view. Knowing he would
be teaching Young Learners “might have stopped [him] from actually going out to Japan
and getting a job because it was something [he] didn’t want to do really.” This was after
his job in Spain, where he had taught Young Learners, an experience he decided he did
not want to repeat it.
In response to Item 4 of the questionnaire, a majority of respondents in the sample
(81%) did a pre-service course such as Cambridge Certificate or the Trinity Certificate
before they started teaching. 19% reported they did not (Figure 3 below):
Some teachers in the interview sample entered the industry and then did a training course.
T1, for instance, got a job in China on the strength of being a native speaker. She did the
CELTA afterwards in order to take up a post in Italy.
Although T6 suggested that “your experience and your qualifications should
match what you teach when you first start,” a centre’s operational needs will usually
overcome the preferences of individual teachers. T5, in the interview sample, said “we
tried to give them preferences… but sometimes it was just ‘well, I’m sorry, you’ve just got
81
19
Fig. 3: Teachers who did a pre-service training course
before starting to teach (item 4).
Percentage of sample of139 who did a trainingcourse
Percentage of sample of139 who did not do atraining course
129
to do it’.” This was the experience of most of the interview sample. In addition, answers
to items 5 and 13 on the questionnaire, which asked respondents where their first teaching
post had been and where they had first taught English to Young Learners, suggested that,
for 70 per cent of the questionnaire sample (97 of the 139), they were the same. Not only
were they expected to teach Young Learners, they were also expected to teach across a
wide range of ages (item 8). Responses to this item on the questionnaire, presented in
Figure 4 below, show that all 139 teachers in the sample have taught the 9-11 age group,
and that almost all have taught teenagers. This suggests these age-groups are the most
predominant in the private language centre sector.
Members of the interview sample indicated that this was a challenge, with about three-
quarters of the sample saying they found it difficult to ‘tune in’ to children, although they
were mostly comfortable working with teenagers. T1, T2 and T3 all felt this age-group
was closer in terms of maturity and language proficiency to the adults they had trained,
and wanted, to teach than younger ones. T16 found the primary age-group “very hard
going indeed – you’ve got to have hundreds of things up your sleeve in case they get
bored.” T13 and T14, both working in Spain, disagreed, T13 finding teenagers “sulky and
cynical” and younger learners “fresh and spontaneous,” although she “drew the line at
nappies and toilets,” meaning Very Young Learners.
T1, also in the interview sample, said she was “not naturally good with children.”
T2 “didn’t really have any experience of communicating with kids that age.” Neither have
children of their own. In fact only two of the 16 teachers in the interview sample have
children. One, T6, said “you’ve got to like kids. I’m not sure I really do. I like my own,
48
93100 98 97
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Under 5 6 to 8 yearolds
9 to 11year olds
12 to 14year olds
15 & 16year olds
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
YL Age-groups taught by sample members
Fig. 4: YL age-groups taught by respondents (item 8).
Under 5
6 to 8 year olds
9 to 11 year olds
12 to 14 year olds
15 & 16 year olds
130
but I’m not sure I want to teach other people’s,” a view echoed strongly by T11 who,
despite having two children of his own, said he had “better things to do than sing ‘The
Wheels on the Bus’ all day.” T8’s comment that “the last time [he] was in a room with
seven year olds, [he] was actually seven” may summarize the situation for many English
Language teachers.
A member of the pilot sample summarized the situation by pointing out how the
teacher of Young Learners “needs to cope with unexpected and/or undesirable
behaviour… Students may start crying because of something that occurred somewhere
else or because they have lost something or argued with a classmate. These moments can
be very stressful for the group” (P13), and for the teacher. T3, in the interview sample,
expressed frustration that, “at 10, they were still ‘boys are here, girls are here, boys are
stupid and I don’t want to sit by that boy’ and it’s just... so absurd really” whilst T1, in
her interview, observed that “some teachers can relate to kids more than [she] can and
they’ll get down on the floor but I don’t do the silly voices.” Further, interviewee T7 said
he observed that “the most successful teachers were the ones that just let themselves go
and bounced around with the children in the classroom.” He said he felt too self-
conscious to do the same. Their reflections on managing behaviour, finding appropriate
learning activities and motivating very different age-groups are considered more fully
later in the chapter when their responses to item 21 (the challenges of teaching English to
Young Learners) are presented in detail.
The next set of questionnaire items asked respondent teachers for information
about their current centres in order to illuminate aspects of private language centre
practice. This could contrast with elements of state-maintained, compulsory education,
where terms and conditions might be very different. In terms of class-size (item 9), the
most common was between 12 and 16, as shown in Figure 5 below:
11
58
23
8
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Less than 12 12 to 16 16 to 20 20+Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Average number of students in classes in respondent teachers' centres
Fig. 5: The average class-size in respondents' centres (item 9).
Less than 12
12 to 16
16 to 20
20+
131
The remoteness of much of the private language centre sector from the daily reality of the
Young Learners attending weekend classes can be demonstrated by the data on course
materials, curriculum and syllabus choice and their alignment to the education system of
the host-country. For example, the majority of teachers in the questionnaire sample use
course materials produced in the UK, as shown in Figure 6 below:
Examples of materials developed, produced and published in the United Kingdom by,
among others, Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, Pearson Longman
or MacMillan, and sold abroad as generic English Language courses suitable for all
contexts and markets include such books as Happy Street, Chatterbox, Pacesetter and
Energy designed for global usage and possibly linked to the Common European
Framework.
The majority of the questionnaire sample, more than 90 per cent of the
respondents, reported that the syllabus and assessment system they followed was
developed in-house by the centre’s director of studies or by a senior teacher, or by the
network’s United Kingdom-based head office (item 11, Figure 7 below):
91
27
67
4
17
0102030405060708090
100
UK-produced Locally-produced Produced in-house
None A combination ofUK, local and in-
house
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Origin of course materials used by sample members
Fig. 6: Course materials used by teachers (item 10).
86
5 2 5
0
20
40
60
80
100
The director ofstudies/senior
teacher
Our head office The localeducationministry
I do
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
People who develop the centre's syllabus and assessment systems
Fig. 7: Who decides your syllabus and assessment system?
(Item 11).
132
Whilst it might be argued that such courses can be more easily adapted to meet learner,
teacher and centre needs, the designers may have little training in this field or much
knowledge of generic principles of course design, suggesting the curriculum or syllabus
might be pedagogically flawed. From the interview sample, T6 claimed to have taught a
class for six months, twice a week, for 45 minutes on a Wednesday and a Saturday and
that “from start to finish it was a complete disaster. They learned about five words in six
months, some fruit and animals… there was no pedagogy.” He said he would just “hold
up some random objects and get them to say it after [him].” A similar report came from
P21 in the pilot sample. One of her first classes involved
substituting a sick teacher and going into a school to teach 25 3 year
olds with no help, no Spanish and only being told they were working on
animals. I did a song and story and tried activities holding up toy
animals etc. It was a nightmare.
The educational value of such classes, to both teachers and children, appears questionable.
In addition, responses to questionnaire item 12 suggest that these courses are not normally
aligned to the host-country’s school curriculum for English Language (Figure 8 below).
Furthermore, some Young Learners sit UK language examinations, for example
Cambridge’s First Certificate (FCE), Advanced (CAE) and Young Learner suite of
Starters, Movers and Fliers (YLE). In the interview sample, T3 found the pressure to
prepare for these examinations prevented her from the work she really wanted to do with
those classes, and also distracted students preparing for their actual school exams. T3
questioned the relevance of the adult-oriented Cambridge Advanced exam to her Spanish
15 year olds, and the value of using a Cambridge Proficiency level book with another
group of teenagers. “They weren’t proficiency level at all,” she said, “But they were in a
20
63
17
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Yes No Not sure
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Responses of sample members to item 12 on curriculum alignment
Fig. 8: Alignment of YL syllabus to host country curriculum
(item 12).
133
provincial town [and] had been going there since they were maybe eleven” so had reached
the end of the pathway simply by being in the centre for several years and had nothing
else to do. Exam classes, or leaving altogether, were the only options.
5.2 Section B: Working with Young Learners
The second part of the questionnaire asked teachers to reflect on their attitudes to and
preparation for teaching English as a foreign language to young learners. The purpose
was to explore links between training and motivation (Research Question 3) and to
identify some challenges of working with children (Research Question 1).
Asked if they had done any training that focused specifically on teaching English
to Young Learners before taking up their first YL post (item 14), the majority had not
(Figure 9 below):
The ‘others’ included Postgraduate Certificates in Education (PGCE) and Montessori
courses rather than English as a Foreign Language programmes, meaning 85 per cent of
the sample had no training for teaching this kind of English Language to children. In the
interview sample this was 14 of the 16 (88 per cent).
Of the two interviewees who had done pre-service training in English Language
Teaching to Young Learners, one had gained a Spanish equivalent of the PGCE and the
other had pursued a Trinity College Certificate which covered both adults and young
learners. This course included two weeks of theory in the United Kingdom followed by
three weeks of teaching practice in a European country with 17 to 18 year old proficiency
level students and a class of 7 year olds. However, for some of the other interviewees,
7 63
18
67
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
CELTYL TYLEC IHCYL Other None. I had notraining.
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
TEYL training courses done by sample members
Fig. 9: Pre-service TEYL training courses taken before first
TEYL job (item 14).
134
their lack of training seemed to create serious issues, particularly with classroom and
behaviour management. T15 is just one member of the interview sample who commented
that, with her class of 8 year olds in Italy, she never felt like a teacher, “just someone who
occupied a room with them” because she had received “no training, no guidance.” T2,
also in the interview sample, thought “a lot of the problems [he] had in teaching young
learners was because of a lack of training.” He said if he “had had that training in the
first place, before [he] started teaching, then it could have been a much better experience
and [he] could have coped a lot better with the difficult situations [he] encountered.” He
believed that some training might have at least given him strategies for managing bad
behaviour, and techniques for controlling the class more effectively.
The issue appears to be compounded by lack of support and in-service training.
For most members of the questionnaire sample this consisted of observation and feedback
or organized in-service training workshops (item 15). Nearly a third of the respondents
who make up the sample, however, said they had received no formal support at all, as
shown in Figure 10 below:
One possible reason for this variation in first-year support for those teaching
English Language to Young Learners in private language centres even within the same
network was supplied by P12, a member of the pilot sample:
Everyone assumed (in a very non-judgmental way) that I was there to
travel and to enjoy myself rather than being there to learn about
teaching
31
10
19
10
41
64
58
32
None. I had to fend for myself
I observed my DoS/Senior Teacher
I did some team-teaching
I had a reduced timetable
Someone helped me with my planning
Someone observed me and gave me…
I went to in-service training/induction
I had a mentor
0 50 100
Typ
es o
f su
pp
ort
rep
ort
ed b
y sa
mp
le m
emb
ers
Percentage of sample (of 139)
Fig. 10: Type of support provided to teachers in first post (item 15).
135
Her observation returns to item 2, Figure 2 above, and the underlying motives for people
becoming English Language Teachers in the first place: travelling. However, whilst T3,
a member of the interview sample, “never had any training at all of any type… didn’t get
any support and didn’t get any training, none whatsoever, nothing at all,” T8, also in the
interview sample, was given an intensive introduction:
Whoever organized the induction realized that everyone had come
straight off the CELTA and so the first thing they did was they had a 3
or possibly 4 day training course and that was basically to get you up
to speed on how to teach kids and what materials [to use].
He found this induction invaluable. Without it, he said, “I would have had nothing in
terms of planning or activities for that first lesson because I had no idea what I was
supposed to do.” A refresher course followed three months later. The centre, he said,
“was quite organized in terms of development and there were several observations a year
so they obviously recognized that there was a gap and were trying to bridge it.” Such
centres appear to recognize the value and potential impact of training on teaching
confidence and teaching quality, and also the potential negative impact of not training
their teachers. They also implicitly recognize limitations in the basic pre-service CELTA,
limitations which they set out to remedy.
Another interviewee, T5, reported that her centre “had a policy that before you
start working you have to have the IHCYL” and if you did not, you were sent on a course.
“The school pays for you to do it, they pay for the course and they pay your wage while you’re
doing it. If you don’t pass then you don’t get the job.” T5 also used her own early feelings
of disorientation to develop an intensive, year-long support programme for teachers in
the centre, investing her own and the centre’s time in team-teaching and observations,
training videos and seminars.
T2, in his interview, said his support was “fairly good, the other teachers were
quite supportive and there was a Young Learner manager who was… quite supportive.”
However, he added “we didn’t actually have any training sessions on teaching young
learners, which maybe we needed.” T7’s induction, on the other hand, consisted of “some
very perfunctory training in showing pictures of animals and going ‘it’s a lion’ and then
all the kids going ‘it’s a lion’” and “about half an hour on being strict.” He said this
induction was “useless… just not very worthwhile” although at least there was an
induction. Not all teachers got that much. As P12 from the pilot sample observed,
“There’s still an incredible dearth in training because schools often prioritize making
money over training teachers.” Such teachers are, in the words of T1, from the interview
sample, “thrown in at the deep end.” This may explain why 59% of the questionnaire
136
sample said they felt unprepared to begin teaching Young Learners (item 16, Figure 11):
By underprepared, members of the questionnaire sample meant they felt they lacked the
skills, techniques and strategies for managing behaviour and discipline, lacked the
knowledge to make informed decisions on materials, resources and activities and lacked
the knowledge of how children learn languages. These were the three key elements that
members of the questionnaire sample suggested should be included in pre-service training
(see Table 10 below). In such cases, these teachers had to draw on their basic training,
the Cambridge CELTA or Trinity College Certificate, and adapt it where possible for
young learners. Those with no training presumably had to invent everything.
In the interview sample, T2 suggested that “a lot of the stuff [he’d] learned on his
certificate course [such as grading language and setting up activities] was relevant to
teaching teenagers.” T3 agreed, observing that “on the CELTA you learn how to adapt a
reading, do a jigsaw-reading, vocabulary games, so I think there are elements of the
CELTA that help you.” Finally, T8 felt that:
The CELTA was quite hands-on. Things like cut-ups, they can all be
applied to teaching YLs, like jigsaws and role-plays, so a lot of the
activities that were taught on the CELTA… are easily adaptable to kids.
In addition, his CELTA course concluded with “a forty-five minute session at the end
[saying] you might be teaching youngsters so here are some activities you might use.”
Whilst this sounds useful, T8 added that most people “just forgot about immediately
because it was the end of the course.”
9
32
50
9
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Well prepared Adequatelyprepared
Not well prepared Completelyunprepared
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
How prepared sample members felt for TEYL when they began
Fig. 11: How prepared teachers felt before they started
TEYL (item 16).
137
T1, however, said she could not adapt the CELTA – “you can’t really because it’s
teaching adults.” The issue for T1, however, appeared to be less about activities and more
about discipline:
The CELTA’s just about adults and then you end up in Spain, which a
lot of teachers do, and you’re thrown into the deep end with classes of
kids and what do you do, when they’re running around the classroom?
She seemed to blame Cambridge’s initial, basic training course for her inability to control
the class because “CELTA doesn’t really deal with discipline as a concept.” It is, however,
an adult course, with, in the words of T7, “an A on the end.” Consequently, as T2 said,
“nothing in the CELTA course prepares you for disciplining young children. It’s
something you just have to learn how to do on the job. Some of it, he said:
is relevant to any age-group.... It’s just that I think there are lots of
things the certificate doesn’t include that you need to know when you’re
teaching young learners like how to manage them in the classroom, how
to make sure they stay focused on the tasks.
For some members of the questionnaire sample, teaching English to Young Learners was
a stressful experience, but for more than half of the same sample, their early experiences
of English Language Teaching to Young Learners were either very or quite enjoyable
(item 17, Figure 12 below):
and their early feelings about teaching Young Learners (item 18) were generally positive
(Figure 13 below):
25
34
30
12
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Very enjoyable Quite enjoyable It was OK I hated it
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
How enjoyable sample members said they found TEYL at the start
Fig. 12: How enjoyable respondents found TEYL at the start
(item 17).
138
Some in the interview sample did not share these feelings, using words such as “fear,”
“miserable,” “terrified,” “sick,” “powerless,” “embarrassed” and “frustrated” whilst T1
“used to dread” her Young Learner classes. T2 had some classes in Italy which “were
terrible and really difficult to teach” whilst T6 said “[I was] shaking before lessons [I]
hated it so much. I couldn't cope with it. I didn't know how to cope with them.”
Interviewee T8 had a further challenge to manage: parents. He recounted that the
parents of the Young Learners in his class would sit either in the lessons themselves or
just outside the classroom “so they can hear everything and you’re conscious all the time
of not just teaching the kids but making your teaching heard to people outside the room.”
He suggested that in such a scenario the priority becomes ‘display teaching’ for a wider
audience rather than actually teaching for the children in the classroom. He was also
conscious that “different parents had different expectations, but a lot of the maybe less
open-minded ones wanted it to be like a more traditional lesson like they [the YLs] might
have in school.” Never fully certain what the parents wanted from him, T8 found this
relationship quite stressful, especially since the school did not clarify the situation, and
he was left to work this out for himself. This he did by trying to ignore the parents’
presence altogether.
Teachers responding to item 19 on the questionnaire reported that their attitudes
and feelings towards teaching English to Young Learners had changed (Figure 14 below),
with more feeling generally positive than before, with a corresponding decrease in
negative feelings, and those saying they were neutral or indifferent remaining largely the
same.
66
1915
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Sample members' reported feelings towards TEYL at the start of their careers
Fig. 13: Teachers' early career feelings about TEYL (item 18).
Generally positive Generally negative Neutral/indifferent
139
Combining the data into one chart illustrates the change (Figure 15 below):
When asked to attribute this change (item 20), the majority of the questionnaire sample
(over 80%) said ‘more experience’ (Figure 16 below) but over half said more training
and/or more knowledge of theory. For some, it was a combination of factors.
75
12 14
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Feelings of sample members towards TEYL now
Fig. 14: How teachers' feelings towards TEYL have changed
(item 19).
More positive More negative Neutral/indifferent
66
1915
75
12 14
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Positive Negative Mixed/neutral
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Teachers' changing attitudes to TEYL over time
Fig. 15:Comparison of early career attitudes and current
career attitudes to TEYL (items 18 and 19).
Then Now
140
One teacher in the interview sample, T8, said he found teaching English to Young
Learners “terrifying” at the start, but later
felt more confident and all the fears I had had originally, they were
giving loads of good feedback and that made a huge difference. I moved
from being quite frightened of these people to being quite comfortable
walking into a room with eighteen of them.
Some members of the pilot sample made similar remarks. P26 has “enjoyed it
more and more because [she has] more experience and skills” whilst P13 finds teaching
English to Young Learners “very enjoyable” having “improved [her] skills considerably
– [though] A lot was trial and error.” Others indicated their in-house training courses like
the International House Certificate in Young Learners (IHCYL) and the Teaching Young
Learners’ English Certificate (TYLEC) had helped. P22 from the pilot sample said that,
since doing the International House certificate, she has “a much clearer idea about how
to actually teach them, rather than just get through the class time.” This seems to
reinforce the importance of training in building teacher confidence and helping to change
attitudes.
For this study, respondents to the questionnaire were presented, as item 21 on the
questionnaire, with a list of eight challenges suggested by members of the pilot sample.
They were asked to rate how challenging they thought each one would be for new,
inexperienced teachers. Their ratings are shown in Figure 17 below:
6060
81
29
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
More practicalclassroom-based
training
More knowledge ofYL learning theories
More 'on the job'experience
Others
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Factors given by teachers to explain more positive attitudes to TEYL
Fig. 16: Possible factors for changes in attitude to TEYL (item 20).
141
The most challenging were identified as managing behaviour and discipline (71%),
teaching a wide range of age groups (41%), motivating Young Learners (34%) and
choosing appropriate learning activities (34%). These challenges were further explored
with the interviewees, who highlighted the same issues, of behaviour management, wide
age-groups, motivation and lesson planning.
Discussing their experiences of behaviour management, T2 and T6 in the
interview sample told similar stories in which they lost control of their classes. T2
recounted the following story:
It started off OK but I had to sit on the floor and they were in this circle
or semi-circle sitting around me, and at one point they just sort of
started fighting each other or something and then about half of them
just went a bit crazy, rolling around on the floor, and I couldn’t get
them to sit up and go back to their chairs. I didn’t know what to do.
T6 had a similar experience with a class of 3 year olds:
They’d just climb on the Wendy house and after about ten minutes of
maybe having half of their attention, getting a few words, I'd lost them
and they were climbing over me, over the toys, half of them are crying,
fighting, throwing things... it was just horrible.
Neither teacher seemed to have a strategy to regain control of their classes. They resorted
to shouting, or sending them out of the room. T8 observed “They were kids so they played
around a lot… I actually couldn’t think of anything to do [except] shout.” T6 also reported
71
34
17
12
25
34
41
2927
5349
60
54 54
48 48
2
14
34
27
22
12
23 23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Managingbehaviour
anddiscipline
MotivatingYLs
Relating toparents
Relating toYLs
Finding andusing
appropriatematerials
Choosingappropriate
learningactivities
Teaching awide range
of agegroups
Justknowingwhere to
start
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Eight challenges of TEYL
Fig. 17: Eight challenges of TEYL (item 21).
V. challenging Q. challenging Not very challenging
142
that he too resorted, unsuccessfully, to shouting when he “went to the class ready to teach
and they’re not listening, they’re talking and throwing things and fighting… I had no
mechanism to control them.”
In this story, T6 was no novice fresh from a training course. He was the Director
of Studies in the centre and had experience of teaching (adults) in seven different
countries. T2, though, was in his second post. He said “found out later from colleagues
that there are techniques you can use for managing young learners but [he] didn’t know
what they were” until afterwards. Both he and T6 suggested that training before they went
to teach Young Learners might have helped them cope with these situations because they
would have been taught some behaviour management strategies.
T5, also in the interview sample, claimed that teachers in her centre found
behaviour management challenging because they did not understand Young Learners.
“They [the teachers] don't understand why they turn round and there's one climbing under
the table.” They “just didn’t know. The kids were running wild [and] they [the teachers]
didn’t understand [why].” This suggests that understanding behaviour may be a critical
factor in managing behaviour and that lack of knowledge of how children work may be
a hindrance.
In their interview, T6 thought that managing behaviour was difficult in a different
language whilst T7 suggested some learners may use the teacher’s lack of knowledge of
the local language as a way of undermining that teacher. He recounted an incident
involving an 8 year old boy who swore at him in class. He did not understand what had
been said until the other learners explained. When T7 challenged the boy, he denied it,
claiming the other children were lying to get him into trouble. T7 did not know what to
do, except send for the centre’s manager who called the boy’s parents. He had neither the
language nor the strategies to deal with it himself, and was made to feel vulnerable as a
consequence. In addition, his credibility in front of the class was undermined. However,
T7 was supported by the local staff. It is not always so.
“Some schools,” T1 noted, “Have strict procedures in place if children are
naughty while others are a bit more oh they’re just kids, you know,” whilst other teachers
in the interview sample reported that there was no discipline because parents pay,
meaning teachers feel unable to send children out of class or punish them for unacceptable
behaviour. T6 reported that, in one centre, he sent a student out of the class because of
his behaviour but the owner of the school returned the child to class on the grounds that
“he was the son of the mayor and you can’t throw out the son of the mayor. He’d paid his
fees, so you couldn’t throw him out.” T6 said he felt “completely undermined.” He also
143
commented that “the local teachers couldn’t understand why you were having discipline
problems because they never had discipline problems. They’d just shout at them in Greek
or threaten to tell their mums.” This is what T7 called the cultural ‘in’ or the ability to
access the local culture in such a way as to “tell them off in a way that makes sense if
you’re a Spanish kid.” For some teachers, finding this cultural ‘in’ may take years.
The same lack of awareness may account for the second most popular response,
of teaching a wide range of age-groups, 89 per cent of the questionnaire sample reporting
this as either very or quite challenging. T5, in the interview sample, noted that her teachers
“didn’t understand what a child of that age [4 years old] should be able to do and what
they shouldn’t be able to do.” She wondered why the teachers were trying to teach certain
things in certain ways given that the children “didn’t have the mental capacity to be able
to deal with what [they were] expecting them to do.” Perhaps a lack of training limited
their personal practical knowledge.
T3, also an interviewee, felt facing “a completely different age-group with
completely different needs” immediately after another age-group required “quite a big
adjustment” though this attitude was not likely to be met sympathetically by T9’s
managers in Hong Kong who allocated him a class of Very Young Learners (3 year olds)
on the grounds that he has an MA in Teaching English to Young Learners from the
University of York. Despite the fact that this MA course focuses on the 6 to 16 age-range,
and does not cover Very Young Learners, T9 said the attitude was that “all YLs are the
same, aren’t they? If you can teach a 12 year old, you can teach a 2 year old.”
T4, in the interview sample, said he struggled to teach 9 to 11 year olds. “I didn’t
know how to do it,” he said, “Because I had not been trained to teach children. I had been
trained to teach teenagers but not children and I was completely lost.” In addition, T4 is
not a native speaker of English, and this, he felt, made his job a little harder.
Mixed-age or mixed-ability classes may also pose particular challenges for
teachers. T6 reported that, in one of his classes, “the kids not only don’t speak English,
half of them don’t even speak each other’s language, half spoke French, half spoke
Arabic. No-one could communicate with anyone else at all.” P3, from the pilot sample,
reported her first lesson as “rather difficult, as students were of different ages and some
of them didn’t know the English alphabet and couldn’t read [English] anyway”
According to another member of the pilot sample (P20), most adults “have elected
on their own time and on their own dime to come and be an English student. [This is] not
necessarily true with kids.” This may pose the teacher the immediate challenge of
motivating and maintaining interest with students who have “come straight out of school
144
for afternoon classes or early evening classes, [and may want] to be somewhere else”
(T8). Motivating learners was said to be very or quite challenging by 87 per cent of the
questionnaire sample, and this may be because the classes were conducted in holidays,
after school or at weekends. T8, in the interview sample, recounted that, in Japan, he
taught two children for 45 minutes every Monday, from 11.30 to 12.15, whilst T3 had a
class of 10 year olds “on Friday evenings at 6 o’clock, after they’d been at school all
week, when the last thing they really wanted to do was study English.” They were, she
said, “really hard work.” T6 reflected that he struggled to keep his 11 to 13 year olds
focused from 4 till 10 in the evening, saying:
I guess they’re tired. They’ve been in school all day, they didn’t want
to be there, they wanted to be at home or watching the football.
Anything except listen to me droning on about the present perfect.
T7 reinforced this in his interview by adding “they really don’t want to be there. They’re
eight, nine, they don’t want to learn English. They want to be out playing football” and
T8 noted that “apart from those students who… realized what they wanted to do after
high school… it was really somewhere they didn’t want to be at all.”
Interviewee T5 commented that her 9 to 11 year olds were “easily distracted and
often [did]n’t want to learn” whilst holiday classes may be used by some parents as much
for child-minding as for English language tuition. “A big problem in a lot of language
teaching for young kids [is] it’s just another place for parents to shove them, to keep them
out of the house for another few hours while they’re at work” (T6). T7 said his students
were “a bunch of … kids who hate you because they don’t want to be there… and they
just played up constantly.” He went on to describe an incident involving a 7 year old girl:
She didn’t move, she just literally didn’t move. She lay her head on her
arms on the table just sobbing, and after about twenty minutes I got the
secretary in and said ‘look get her parents to come and take her away
because it’s a waste of time.’
T7 had no idea what to do in this situation, or why the girl was so upset, and did not have
the language to find out. He felt disempowered and uncomfortable in this situation, and
blamed the school for placing him in it. He also indicated that he did not feel particularly
comfortable around children, but that some sort of training might at least have given him
a strategy to engage with her. T7 is another Young Learner teacher who does not have
children of their own. This seemed to some members of the interview sample, to make a
crucial difference in terms of forming relationships with Young Learners generally, a
point made by T12 who said she was not “remotely interested” in children, their interests
or culture. Perhaps to be an effective Young Learner teacher, one needs to care about
145
them and enjoy their company, not remain indifferent, or, in the case of T11, T15 and
T16, expressing some hostility towards children. That kind of attitude might make the
existing challenges more challenging still.
Naming one final potential issue, 88 per cent of the teachers in the questionnaire
sample found identifying, selecting and using appropriate language learning activities
either very or quite challenging. 79 per cent of the sample said they thought finding
appropriate materials and resources either very or quite challenging, a view echoed by
members of the interview sample. T4, for instance, observed that, with adults, he “was
used to doing things for a little bit longer [but] noticed with children it’s like five minutes
and you need to change activity.” T8, also in the interview sample, “found it quite difficult
in some classes to gauge activities that would be the right level for everyone” whilst T3
said “it takes a while to get to grips with what type of activities actually work.” Both these
teachers said they had to devote time at weekends to creating their own materials and
making their own resources to compensate for the limited range of their centres.
T3 suggested that a key aspect of planning English Language lessons for Young
Learners was finding topics of interest to the learners, “whether that be sport or whether
that be music, and that was something [she] learned. It was a question of experimenting”
and asking the learners. T8, on the other hand, recalled his lessons as essentially exercises
in survival planning:
We did lots of physical things and throwing balls around, writing on the
board, running races to the board. I just didn’t really know what to do.
Before the lesson the planning was ‘I’ve got forty-five minutes so I’m going
to try and find ten exercises which will mean 4.5 minutes and I’m going to
watch the clock and see what happens…’
This strategy seems to lack a pedagogical foundation, but T8 said he did not know how
to organize a Young Learner lesson, or what activities and resources were available to
help him teach them any English at all.
Following the identification of areas of English Language Teaching to Young
Learners practitioners felt were potentially challenging for new teachers, item 22 asked if
respondents thought a module aimed specifically at preparing trainees for teaching
English to Young Learners should be added to initial training courses such as the
Cambridge CELTA. As Figure 18 below indicates, three-quarters did.
146
Some members of the interview sample suggested this kind of updating of the training,
to include more input on teaching English to Young Learners with less emphasis on
games and activities and more on classroom management, discipline and child
development. In the interview sample, T2, for example, felt the CELTA should
“definitely” include a module on teaching Young Learners because “most teachers do
have to teach young learners.” R28, in the questionnaire sample, went further:
In general, I think teachers should start training with YLs first and then
progress to adults. From a recruitment point of view, all BC centres
now require their teachers to have some YL experience and a YL
qualification.
In other words, because teaching Young Learners is now such a significant element of
the English Language Teaching culture, and arguably more challenging than teaching
adults, the training emphasis should switch from adults to Young Learners. In a complete
reversal of the current situation, R28 suggests that the Young Learner extension to
Cambridge’s adult-oriented certificate or the Young Learner Trinity College certificate
should be the basic pre-service training course and then those teachers who want to work
with adults could do a supplementary or extension course later.
In the interview sample, T6, a trainer for both Cambridge’s CELTA and its higher
level Diploma (DELTA), took a different view:
The big problem is you’ve got to do practice teaching and obviously to
do that you need classes and you need practice students and there are
huge legal issues with having kids and it’s such a minefield. We struggle
to get students for our adult classes let alone how we’d deal with kids
and so then if it’s going to be just on a theoretical level I don’t know
how helpful that is really.
74
17
9
Fig. 18: Respondents' views on whether a TEYL module
should be included on the CELTA course (item 22).
Percentage of sample (of139) who said TEYL trainingshould be included onCELTA
Percentage of sample (of139) who said TEYL trainingshould NOT be included onCELTA
Percentage of sample (139)who did not know
147
He felt that employers should take responsibility for Young Learner training through
assisted teaching, observations and co-teaching, similar to the kind of induction
programme provided by T5. Nevertheless, some kind of training for teaching English as
a foreign language to Young Learners seems to be required.
Asked what it might cover (item 23), members of the questionnaire sample made
suggestions ranging from lesson planning to classroom management but the most
frequent request was for input on child development theory.
R14 said a training module should “Outline the general abilities of different age
groups [and] Focus on child development outlining what they can do/can't do at different
stages of development” whilst R15 thought it should explain the “Differences between
adult and YL teaching; differences between (eg) 8/9 year olds and 14/15 year olds, styles
of learning,” as did R111 who wanted input on “methodologies adapted to the different
ages.” This underlines the notion that teaching varied ages can be challenging.
R45, on her questionnaire, wanted something on “Language acquisition theory -
differences between adults and kids. Practical advice, eg on motivation, routines and
positive discipline procedures. Expectations of YL progress and behaviour.” R72 also
wanted “YL learning theory” but also “how to adapt material; how to use
stories/songs/chants effectively; phonics and literacy.” R65 thought the programme
should include “basic child psychology, language acquisition and SLA, key
considerations for teaching YLs, ensuring fun activities have strong learning outcomes.”
R87 suggested something similar:
lesson planning for YLs (stir & settle) an understanding of cognitive
development, using authentic materials (stories, songs etc) rather than
course-books, SEN basics, literacy / phonics basics (depending on age)
a set of ideas that seems to cover most of the aspects of English Language Teaching to
Young Learners discussed earlier in this chapter (Section 5.1).
R103, in the questionnaire sample, suggested “Basic lesson shapes for YLs.
Practical ideas for getting YLs up and out of their chairs. Getting them to speak.
Classroom management” and R126 recommended “Stages of YL cognitive development,
YL styles, best primary practice, classroom management with YL.”
The many and varied suggestions of the questionnaire sample were grouped into
three main categories:
Child development and learning, including age-related needs = 48%.
Classroom management, including behaviour and motivation = 39%;
Lesson planning, including activities and materials = 33%;
148
The breakdown appears in Table 10 below and is discussed further in Chapter Six,
although these categories seem to reflect the main challenges of teaching English as a
foreign language to Young Learners identified in response to item 21 and presented in
Figure 17 above:
Theories of child development and
learning
(48%)
Classroom
management
(39%)
Lesson
planning
(33%)
Needs of different ages = 11%
Language learning theory = 13%
Differences between TEA/TEYL = 10%
Overview of child development and
psychology = 14%
CR mgt = 31%
Behaviour = 4%
Motivation = 4%
Lesson shapes
and types = 10%
Materials = 9%
Activities = 14%
Table 10: Suggestions for initial, pre-service TEYL preparation module (item 23).
These ideas informed the development of the possible framework for training teachers of
English to Young Learners presented in Chapter Six (6.4) below.
Two final observations from the questionnaire sample indicate that some teachers
have strong feelings over this issue. In saying this was “Far too large a topic to cover in
a module (or even a week – the CELTYL is a joke!)” R98 may be implying that the Young
Learner extension often feels like tokenistic, a gesture to Young Learner training, rather
than something imbued in learning theory and principles of pedagogical practice. The
Young Learner extension to Cambridge’s CELTA, like the certificate course itself, is
‘theory-light’ but it is theory that many of these teachers seem to need. Finally, R69 in
the questionnaire sample echoing the view of T6 in the interview sample, made the
following comment:
Given that Cambridge are stopping the CELTYL this is a timely
question. I think when people are doing the CELTA there is quite
enough going on - it's the most stressful month of your life for many so
the addition of another age group to cater to could prove way too much
for some. Some people love teaching YLs and others don't so you
shouldn't be forced to do it if you don't want to as you just won't teach
them so well.
R69 may be right, but unfortunately, the reality of life in the private language centre is
that many teachers are forced to do it and it seems unfair to them, their young learners
and the young learners’ parents if they are untrained as well as unwilling.
5.3 Section C: Teacher training and development
The third part of the questionnaire asked teachers to reflect and report on their experiences
of and their attitudes towards their own opportunities for continuing development,
149
beginning with a reflection on the most rewarding or stimulating experiences (item 24)
from a list of five that emerged as the most common in the pilot study. As shown in Figure
19 below, the majority of the questionnaire sample selected Cambridge’s Diploma in
English Language Teaching to Adults (DELTA):
The 16 per cent ‘none of these’ cited instead team-teaching experiences, peer observation
and being a trainer. 70 per cent of centres in the questionnaire sample offered their
teachers funding to undertake the DELTA and other courses, including MA degrees.
In the interview sample, T3, like T1, “enlisted the help of fellow teachers who
perhaps had more experience” but said “support from the actual bosses [was] minimal.”
This help seemed to consist of practical tips and advice on classroom management
ranging from “use simple language” and “don’t smile till Christmas” to “keep them busy”
Only three teachers said they were advised by colleagues to ‘make it fun.’
Asked to describe what their current or most recent centre was providing in terms
of teacher development opportunities from a list of eight that emerged from the pilot study
(item 25), most teachers in the questionnaire sample chose lesson observation and
feedback and in-service training workshops (Figure 20 below):
3
24
4
43
1316
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Example teacher development experiences as rated by sample members
Fig. 19: Most rewarding or stimulating developmental
experiences of sample members (item 24).
Attending a conference
A moment/event in aclassroom
An INSET workshop
A training course (e.g.DELTA)
An academic course(e.g. MA/MSc)
None of these
150
This range of opportunities suggests an active response to meeting teachers’
developmental needs and interests, with only 4 per cent of teachers reporting no organized
teacher development programme in their centres and over two-thirds reporting a range of
informal and formal possibilities involving both colleagues and senior staff.
The teacher development programme organized by T5, a member of the interview
sample, for 12 new teachers in a centre with 800 students included weekly training
sessions, two seminars each week, regular in-house conferences on topics such as
classroom management, monthly one-to-one tutorials with each teacher and termly
observations. In the pilot sample, P25, who worked for one of the large global networks,
said her centre provides “lots of opportunities for development including a comprehensive
in-house training programme, regular informal peer-led sessions, opportunities for
internationally-recognized qualifications, a mentoring and coaching service, robust line-
management programme.”
For other respondents, teacher development appears more random. P6, also in the
pilot sample, said her teacher development programme was “haphazard and consisted
mostly of watching a few videos.” P8 (pilot sample) wrote “teacher development is
something I have had very little of for YLs. I know it and I have been asking for it to be
rectified for a number of years.” He felt that, “a lack of further training and feeling of
being jaded have taken the zip out of teaching YLs.” He was the centre’s training manager
yet seemed unable to incorporate Young Learner training into his own programme. Why
remained unclear. The teaching centre manager or the teaching staff as a whole may have
had different priorities. P8 left this post shortly after contributing the questionnaire.
Pilot sample member P22, working for the same organization, had another view:
4
21
33
78
71
68
89
84
0 20 40 60 80 100
None. We don't have one.
Research opportunities
Time off for attending conferences
Opportunities for informal 'sharing' with colleagues
Funding for training/further study
Peer observations organized with colleagues
Observations by senior staff
INSETs
Percentage of sample (of 139)
Op
po
rtu
nti
ies
for
tea
cher
dev
elo
pm
ent
Fig. 20: Possible activities and opportunities for teacher development
(item 25).
151
“senior teachers and co-ordinators are supposed to provide INSETs for their product
area, [and] this happens to a varying degrees,” the implication being that In-Service
Education and Training depends on the commitment of the training manager. This is
echoed in the interview sample by T10 who felt that, for some, organizing teacher
development, and teaching English to Young Learners itself, were “merely career
stepping-stones.” He reported some managers in his centre “used TD as a way of scoring
points against other managers and undermining teachers’ confidence”. In addition,
interviewee T9 reported that managers and trainers in one centre in which he had worked
saw teachers as “obstacles to progress – if things didn’t happen in the way they were
supposed to it was the teachers’ fault for not doing it right.” If the teachers were more
co-operative, this view implies, the centre would run more smoothly, the lessons would
be better and the students would be happier.
As T1 in the interview sample said, “you can do a young learner certificate, I
suppose, at International House if you went there, but private language schools are not
going to do that,” meaning finance it or give teachers time off to do it. Teachers would
therefore need to pay for the course themselves and do it in their vacation. This requires
commitment and motivation, money and opportunity, elements not always available to
even the most enthusiastic individual. In addition, doing a training course may not always
show commitment, or motivation. T12 did the Young Learner extension to the Cambridge
CELTA “because it was there, it was paid for and [she] thought it might look good on a
CV” although she “wasn’t interested in YLs at all.”
Respondents to the questionnaire item 26 rated eight teacher development
activities as very, quite, not very or not at all useful, and most (over 80 per cent in each
case) selected talking with colleagues and trying new activities as very useful (Figure 21):
86
57
29 28
84
12 16 1613
40
6152
17
6358
53
1 4 717
0
25 21 25
0 0 2 3 0 1 5 7
0102030405060708090
100
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
TD opportunities and activities
Fig. 21: Most useful teacher development activities (item 26).
very useful
quite useful
not veryuseful
not useful atall
152
The pilot study yielded similar data, with 78 per cent and 76 per cent of the sample of 41
favouring talking with colleagues and trying new activities respectively. This implies
most teachers value informal, self-directed learning highly, although organized training
courses are also popular. These courses include the Diploma in English Language
Teaching to Adults (DELTA), a certificate with high currency within the industry.
In terms of what respondents valued most in training sessions or in-service
workshops (item 27), this research found that practical application was seen as the most
important element by three-quarters of the sample, a large majority (Figure 22 below):
The items for this rating-scale were suggested by members of the pilot sample, 49 per
cent of whom said training workshops should be practical, relevant and applicable, one
(P1) stating they “must be relevant and immediately applicable. Theory not very useful.
Want immediately tips/specific ideas I can implement” whilst another (P12) believes “it’s
important for teachers to have a say in constructing the programme and voicing what it
is they need” if the programme is to be useful and relevant. One member of the pilot
sample (P20) wrote:
Practical activities and behaviours that can be used in the classroom.
ZERO theory. No TEFL-style activities for trainees, the methodological
basis for teaching a language DOES NOT APPLY TO TEACHING
PEDAGOGY [his capitals]. As little discussion as possible, as it is
inevitably hijacked by people who love hearing themselves speak.
P20 seems to have attended some sessions in which he left feeling dissatisfied with the
structure and input of the workshop, but he also shows some degree of antagonism to the
whole idea of ‘TEFL-style activities’ and the methodological discourse of the industry
76
4 4
14
1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Aspects and elements of INSET training workshops as rated by sample members
Fig. 22: What respondents value most in an INSET session
(item 27).
Practical content applicableto classroom
Discussion of theory andideas
An interesting range ofparticipants/trainers
Based on teachers' needs
Other
153
itself. This is an extreme reaction to in-service training workshops, but it might be
suggested that this particular individual could perhaps find a different forum for reflecting
on practice, and a different developmental pathway. Some possibilities are outlined in the
proposed training and development framework in Chapter Six (6.4) below.
One means of supporting development is through a formalized plan. 82 per cent
of respondents in this research had such a job plan, or a personal development plan,
defined (by Day, 1999) as a set of goals, objectives or targets mutually agreed by teacher
and manager (item 28, Figure 23 below):
In the questionnaire sample, R19’s job plan requires evidence of “observed lessons,
lesson plans, other activities and contributions to school.” R11, on the other hand, also
in the questionnaire sample, has a job plan that is “very loosely and not rigorously
implemented… just so the director of the branch can state in his/her job plan that that
responsibility was dealt with.” Since both respondents work for the same organization,
this seems inconsistent.
Policies on probation are also inconsistent. Although three-quarters of
respondents said they did have probationary periods (item 29), 4 per cent said they did
not know if they had had one or not (Figure 24 below), which suggests some degree of
miscommunication on the part of the centre’s management:
82
17
1
Fig. 23: Members of the sample with job plans (item 28).
Percentage of 139respondents with a jobplan
Percentage of 139respondents with no jobplan
Percentage of 139respondents who did notknow
154
‘Probation’ is defined here as a fixed period of time in which both teacher and employer
are expected to perform to an agreed, pre-determined standard. If this standard is not met,
several options are available including contract termination, further training, more
support or an extension to the probation. A probationary period can serve as a useful
period in which the centre helps a new teacher adjust to a new context. It can also be
useful for organizations which recruit centrally then send teachers abroad to outlying
centres, conduct interviews via the telephone or Skype or use competency-based
application procedures with generic interview questions written by a Human Resources
administrator in a distant head office rather than in the local centre. In such cases, the
local centre may have little control over who they are sent and the first meeting with a
new teacher may occur at the airport.
Career pathways in English Language Teaching to Young Learners seem to
involve teachers taking on roles and responsibilities additional to classroom teaching.
Item 30 asked teachers to consider a list of seven roles that had been developed from the
pilot study and indicate which ones they had performed. The most common on the pilot
study were writing materials (83 per cent), developing courses (74 per cent), training other
teachers (71 per cent) and leading in-service training workshops (70 per cent). The
questionnaire returned similar data (Figure 25) with a large majority (88 per cent)
selecting writing materials:
75
22
4
Fig. 24: Members of the sample with probationary
periods (item 29).
Percentage of 139respondents who had aprobationary period
Percentage of 139respondents who did nothave a probationary period
Percentage of 139respondents who did notknow
155
Reasons why teachers had chosen these particular pathways were not explored in this
study, but might form the basis of future research into teacher motivation.
For some in the interview sample, they were given responsibilities because they
had a qualification. T9, for example, got an MA in Teaching English to Young Learners
and was immediately appointed as the centre’s Young Learner trainer, despite having no
experience, interest or training in this area. T6, promoted to Director of Studies, was faced
with a bigger challenge in an account that may indicate some of the issues particular to
working in the commercial sector:
It was a new school, a massive school, opened for really rich
Moroccans and one of their big things was we've got to attract kids,
young kids, get them when they’re really young and we can get the
parents, and we'll get the older brother and sister and we'll have the
whole family.
The owners, however, found that, having recruited Very Young Learners, they had no-
one to teach them. “They were,” continued T6, “These sons of very wealthy people, VIPs,
the kind of people the owners really wanted to impress, so they said ‘you’re the director
of studies, you should teach it’,” And he did. He had neither training nor experience of
working with such young children. He said it was “absolutely dreadful.” He did not say
whether the owners’ strategy of ‘getting the whole family in’ was successful or not,
although he did say that, because he was the director of studies, he got no support in
working with this group of very young children. He was expected, by other teachers as
88
78
72 72 7166
37
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Roles and responsibilities
Fig. 25: Additional roles and responsibilities (item 30).
156
well as by the owners, to be able to manage. He had a Diploma in English Language
Teaching (to adults), after all, and was supervising other teachers.
Questionnaire item 31 asked members of the sample what kind of support or
training they had received in order to help them fulfil these new roles. Figure 26 below
shows that just over one-third of the sample received training with more than half learning
how to do it by themselves.
In the interview sample, both T10 and T11 found moving from teacher to senior teacher
with supervisory responsibilities challenging because of a lack of training to help them
learn how to manage teachers. T10 found “relating to the management team” difficult,
whilst T11 said he was told by his managers that he was “too concerned with teaching
and teachers and was not ‘corporate’ enough.” Management priorities here seem to be
something other than supporting teachers.
Item 32 of the questionnaire asked teachers what they were hoping to do in the
next stage of their careers. The two most common responses were becoming a trainer or
leaving the world of English Language Teaching for something different, as shown in
Figure 27:
40
21
27
57
22
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
G O T T R A I N I N G
H A D A M E N T O R
H A D A R E D U C E D
T I M E T A B L E
R E A D U P O N I T M Y S E L F
N O T H I N G . I L E A R N E D O N
T H E J O B
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Sources of possible support for sample members in new roles
Fig. 26: Type of support received in new roles (item 31).
157
P18, a member of the pilot sample which supplied the list, said she was “getting
disillusioned with employer, efl world is too much like a business now” though another
(P23) said “I love being in a profession where I can facilitate people developing the ability
and desire to be good citizens of this world.”
Other members of the pilot sample offered further insight into some of the
limitations of a career in the industry. P23 had now reached a plateau: “I have applied for
other jobs but not been shortlisted as I do not have the opportunity to develop the skills I
need.” P26 concurred, saying “It often feels you have to move into management, which
isn’t always appealing.” P21, a very experienced teacher, felt similarly stuck:
There are few opportunities for me in the current school as I would
never be DOS and a senior teacher role is not something I’d go back
to. The school is more of a springboard for teachers with less
experience than me, so while it’s good for them, for more experienced
teachers, opportunities are more limited.
P21, not globally mobile, is “stuck in a country with chronic unemployment… [where]
it’s… difficult for a foreigner to find any other type of job.” Once a teacher has performed
all the roles that interest them, there may be no challenge, or stimulation, left in the job.
In the interview sample, T8, reflecting on his experience of teaching English as a
foreign language to Young Learners, commented that he would regard a return to Young
Learners after three years in a United Kingdom university teaching English for Academic
Purposes to postgraduate students as a retrograde step in his career. Whilst he “enjoyed
teaching kids and I actually liked it in the end, compared to teaching EAP either here or
14
12
9
8
8
14
12
5
13
5
0 5 10 15
Leave ELT for something different
Develop my teaching
Move to a new centre/country
Go into management
Get more qualifications
Become a trainer
Write materials
Do/publish research
Stay in my present post/centre
Go freelance
Percentage of sample (of 139)
Po
ssib
le c
are
er m
ove
s fo
r sa
mp
le m
emb
ers
Fig. 27: Where respondents might go next in their careers (item 32)
158
in a different country certainly in terms of pay and possibly even respect, it’s the lesser
job. It’s where you start.” However, the majority of teachers in the questionnaire sample
(84 per cent) intend to remain within the industry, suggesting high job satisfaction among
these people.
The penultimate item on the questionnaire, number 37, asked members of the
sample to complete the sentence ‘Teaching YLs is…’ with a word from a list comprising
responses from the pilot sample. The majority of responses were positive, as shown in
Figure 28 below:
In addition, members of the interview sample said that Young Learners tend to be less
critical of the teacher/teaching (T3), tend to learn more quickly than adults (T5, T13),
seem to be less reluctant to take risks with language (T14) and appear to express
themselves with more freedom and less self-consciousness (T8). The interviewees also
suggested that Young Learners more generally have less life-experience and world-
knowledge than adults and that this might limit the themes and topics available to teachers
planning English language lessons for Young Learners. Finally, most interviewees
viewed Young Learners as enthusiastic, honest, flexible, spontaneous and sensitive and
whilst these may be potentially positive qualities, they can also present additional
challenges, particularly in terms of managing behaviour, as well as the primary challenge
of teaching a new language to children.
33
4
40
4
14
4
1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Rewarding Exhausting Positivelychallenging
Negativelychallenging
Fun Exciting Boring
Per
cen
tag
e o
f sa
mp
le (
of
13
9)
Word-prompts on item 37 used to complete the sentence
Fig. 28: 'Teaching YLs is...' (item 37)
159
T5 in the interview sample commented that, although she likes children and was
therefore highly motivated, she “soon realized that wasn’t always the case and there were
a lot of people who really didn’t want to do it.” T2 said his motivation
depended on the kids. I mean if the kids were nice and interested, I felt
really motivated but with the classes who were not motivated I felt it
was just something that I had to get through and cope with as best as I
could.
It may seem unfair to place responsibility for motivating the teacher onto the child, but,
as T3 noted:
YLs absorb so much and they’re pretty happy to do whatever you ask them
to do. They’re not worried about making mistakes, they’re not worried
about how they look in front of the others so I think you can’t not be
motivated really when you’ve got kids like that.
However, for T1, “Kids don’t have enough language for me. I mean, you’ve got five words
and an hour and a half, you have to make a class with five words. What can you do with five
words?” Finally, and by contrast, T14 in the interview sample enjoys teaching English to
young learners very much, although he “doesn’t really know what [he’s] doing.” His
admission might summarize the situation for a number of the English Language Teaching
practitioners working with Young Learners who responded to this research and made up
both the questionnaire and the interview samples.
5.4 Authentication of findings and summary
The data presented above was collected from 139 questionnaires and 16 face-to-face
interviews. A summary was emailed to a number of English Language Teaching
practitioners, including members of the sample, as discussed in Chapter Four (4.8) above.
The purpose was to test the data’s credibility and authenticity through discovering how
far they resonated with the experience of others in the industry. The Young Learner
training co-ordinator for a large global English Language Teaching provider replied that
the data was “pretty much what [he] expected and tallies with [his] own experience.” He,
a native speaker teacher working in a private language centre in a foreign context, related
feeling “completely unprepared and inadequate” when asked to teach children – he had
a Certificate in Teaching English as a Foreign Language to Adults (CTEFLA), the earlier
version of the Cambridge CELTA before its revision in 1997, but “no skills at all suited
to kids.” He taught 8 year olds in Japan, without training, “and was a bit lost for a while”
then did the CELTA Young Learner extension course and gained the foundation he
needed to work with children. As he said, “you can ‘get away with it’ in a private
language school context for a while with YLs, but when it comes to VYLs, you absolutely
160
cannot ‘get away’ with anything. If you don’t have training, they’ll walk all over you –
sometimes literally” (Private correspondent, 2014, personal communication). Some
teachers who participated in this research such as T2 and T6 would echo this view. As
the correspondent indicated, his centre had “a lot of 5-7s… it’s a growth market for us…
we have to ask a lot of new teachers to teach these classes” and they are not always able
to train them before they start teaching.
In summary, the data contributed to answering the first research question, the
challenges facing teachers of English as a foreign language to Young Learners in private
language centres in international contexts and foreign cultures, by identifying the
following key points:
managing behaviour, discipline, teaching and learning across a range of ages;
managing the learning process through principled selection and use of resources
and activities;
needing to teach across the 5 to 16 age-range, and sometimes under 5s;
motivating learners who may be attending classes in their holidays or weekends
at the insistence of their parents and following courses that do not seem directly
relevant to their needs and interests.
It also emerged that ‘challenge’ is not necessarily negative. For some teachers, engaging
with these issues may be exciting, stimulating, motivating and fulfilling.
In answer to the second research question, the type of opportunities for training
and development available to those teachers, the data showed that
most teachers take a training course for teaching English Language to adults but
fewer take one for teaching English to Young Learners;
some teachers are able to adapt their adult training for Young Learners but some
are not;
the level and quality of in-service support is variable, even within networks;
the most common forms of teacher development are in-service education and
training workshops and lesson observations;
teachers seem to value other activities, particularly informal, self-directed ones,
more highly although formal training courses like the Cambridge Diploma in
English Language Teaching to Adults (DELTA) have a high currency;
there appear to be opportunities for career progression and teachers can pursue
their ambitions for academic and teaching qualifications, or occupationally as
161
managers, trainers, materials writers or course developers;
despite the challenges, most English Language teachers want to remain in the
industry.
On the third question of how training and development opportunities help teachers
manage the challenges of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners, the
research revealed the following:
teacher development activities and opportunities and training courses and
programmes can provide knowledge and information that teachers can apply to
their Young Learner English language classes and support them in making
informed, principled decisions;
the key to engaging with these opportunities and managing one’s own
development effectively appears to be motivation and this can depend on the
centre and the context as much as on the individual teacher’s personality.
The implications of these answers for commercial, private language centres providing
English Language Teaching to Young Learners as a commodity within a globalized
English Language Teaching industry are discussed further in Chapter Six below.
162
Chapter Six
Discussion of data and findings
This chapter discusses the findings of the research presented in Chapter Five into the
challenges, training and development opportunities and career pathways of teachers of
English as a foreign language to Young Learners aged between 5 and 16 in private
language schools, and their implications for this specialist area within an increasingly
globalized and commercialized industry. It relates these findings to relevant, current
literature, situating and discussing them in the wider context of English Language
Teaching and the teaching of English as a foreign language whilst considering their
implications for the industry before indicating ways in which the suggestions made by
respondents might be adapted into a framework for a training programme to help teachers
prepare for the challenges of teaching English to Young Learners.
The chapter is in five parts and is structured around the three research questions
which underpinned the study. The first, 6.1, discusses the findings on the main challenges
of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners in private language schools.
These were identified by the research sample as managing behaviour, motivation,
selecting materials, resources and activities, versatility across age-groups and building
relationships. The second, 6.2, discusses the experiences of and needs for pre-service
training and in-service development identified by the research and the possible career
pathways open to teachers whilst the third, 6.3, discusses the findings on how
practitioners engage with teaching English to Young Learners, including the role of
attitude, motivation and personality in the construction of personal practical knowledge.
This part also considers some challenges particular to non-native English speaker teachers
(NNESTs). The fourth part, 6.4, outlines the content and focus of a training and teacher
development programme for Young Learner English language teachers based on the
research data. Key points, claims and recommendations are summarized in 6.5.
6.1 The challenges of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners
Copland and Garton (2014) claim that “there is no conclusive evidence for the supposed
benefits of the early introduction of English into the curriculum” (p. 224) and yet the
teaching of English as a foreign language is expanding rapidly, into primary, pre-primary
and earlier (Enever, 2011). This is despite the fact that such young children are not yet
literate in their own native languages and lack the cognitive ability to grasp abstract
concepts such as grammar (Brewster, et al., 2002). It seems not to matter. As the world
appears to become increasingly homogenized both culturally and economically, and the
163
English language becomes increasingly dominant as a result, some parents, and
governments, seem persuaded that knowledge of the English language is critical to
economic success, and the sooner this knowledge comes, the better. This may be
particularly true in countries where, according to Scovel (1999), “there is an implicit faith
that younger learners are better language learners” (p. 122). Here, he claims, parents “are
especially keen to enrol their children in [private] nursery schools or kindergartens which
commit a substantial amount of time and resources to English-language instruction”
(ibid., p. 122). Rixon (2013) revealed that China, Japan and Taiwan, Croatia, Egypt and
Spain send between 40 and 60 per cent of their primary school children to private
language centres whilst more than 60 per cent of the children in Cyprus, Greece and Sri
Lanka are studying English out of school. This has made teaching English to Young
Learners a popular and lucrative income-stream within the English Language Teaching
industry, not only in terms of private school fees but also the supporting infrastructure of
course-book publishing, testing and online resourcing.
6.1.1 The context of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners
Learning a second or foreign language may not involve the same process as learning a
first or native one. “Learning a language in a school environment is a very different
experience. For one thing, the hours of language exposure are much more limited” than
learning at home whilst, in addition, “it is probable that [in school] the child will take part
in activities aimed at engaging the group rather than the individual” (Copland & Garton,
2014, p. 224). The school or group context may, it appears, possibly hinder early learning
rather than support it. Furthermore, the view that early exposure to English is valuable in
itself may also be tenuous. As Scovel (1999) points out, listening to a lot of music over a
long period of time does not mean one will become a musician, be pitch-perfect or even
appreciate music. One might become bored by it.
Phillipson (1992) suggests that the real impact of the ‘younger is better’ belief is
to “consolidate English at the expense of other languages, perpetuate dependence on aid
and expertise from the core English-speaking countries… [and create] more jobs for
teachers of English” (p. 209). The learning and teaching of English may be secondary to
the generating of income, and this places the private language centre in an ambiguous
position, balancing educational principles with the need to generate sufficient profit to
remain a viable business.
Private language centres appear to position themselves as providing a ‘better’
language learning experience than the state-maintained schools can, with up-to-date
164
methods and materials, smaller classes, course-books from the United Kingdom or the
United States, examinations from Cambridge University and a clearly identifiable English
language product that is emphatically not local but global in its scope (Bourne, 1996;
Ellis, 2013; Emery, 2012; Enever & Moon, 2009; Garton, et al., 2011; Rixon, 2000,
2013).
In this research, where the sample was drawn from private language centres, 69
per cent of the questionnaire sample had classes smaller than 16 (Figure 5 above), 91 per
cent were using materials produced and published in the United Kingdom (Figure 6
above) and 98 per cent followed a curriculum developed either by the centre itself, the
head office or the class teacher (Figure 7 above). The perception that this is somehow
‘better’, perhaps because it appears more globally transferrable, underpins the private
language centre sector and helps enterprising individuals identify business opportunities
such as teaching English to Young Learners (Bourne, 1996; Ellis, 2013; Enever & Moon,
2009; Rixon, 2013). As a consequence, both the teachers and the centres have two sets of
external customers, the children who attend classes and the parents who pay for them.
This raises the possibility of additional pressures as teachers try to satisfy the needs and
interests of both, remain accountable to both, and provide ‘value for money.’ T8 was one
teacher who felt the additional scrutiny of parents to be intrusive, and indicated that
forming relationships with them was a particular challenge for a Young Learner English
language teacher.
6.1.2 The challenges of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners
The teachers who contributed to this research indicated that four key challenges are
classroom and behaviour management, motivation, working with a wide range of age-
groups and finding appropriate learning activities and resources. This seems to concur
with the literature (Brewster, et al., 2002; Moon, 2000; Pinter, 2011) and suggests that
children may have a number of behavioural and emotional characteristics that are
recognizable world-wide regardless of culture or context and that those characteristics
can influence the whole teaching and learning process. These might include still-
developing literacy and oracy skills (Machura, 1991), affective issues such as the need
for security and routine (Brewster, et al., 2002) and still-developing motor skills
(Vassiliou, 2014).
Writers such as Beddall (2013), Pinter (2006) and Moon (2005) suggest that
teachers of English to Young Learners need to know how children learn languages and
how they develop and mature if they are to employ appropriate and effective teaching
165
strategies. An awareness of what children can be expected to do at different ages might
help teachers with selecting and planning appropriate lessons. As Copland and Garton
note, “a child of three will be very different from a child of five or seven and classroom
approaches that are suitable for the latter will not be so for the former” (2014, p.225).
Finally, some understanding of what interests children (T3), what motivates them and
what kind of strategies can be used to engage them can help teachers in the minute-by-
minute, day-to-day management of Young Learner English language classes. T5 is one
interviewee who suggested some teachers struggle because they do not know what
children can and cannot do, and T1, T2 and T6 claimed that their lack of techniques and
strategies for managing Young Learners created problems for them in their classrooms.
Managing behaviour may not just be a matter of keeping control of the classroom.
It may be more about reading a class to anticipate, pre-empt or defuse potentially
disruptive behaviour. Teachers need to be sensitive to the dynamics of the classroom,
aware of existing relationships and of the currents that might underlie those relationships,
perhaps influencing the group’s behaviour. Identifying, understanding and managing
these dynamics might be critical to a teacher’s ability to manage a class, and those
dynamics can differ from class to class and from age-group to age-group.
Emery (2012), Moon (2000), Richards and Pennington (1998), Numrich (1996)
and Veenman (1984) all suggest managing disruptive behaviour is particularly
challenging. Faced with behaviour such as fighting (T2), using offensive language or
crying (T7), some teachers appear to lack appropriate responses. Some (T8) resort to
shouting, others to sending the child out of the classroom (T6). Whether these are
effective classroom management strategies is another issue. These teachers say they had
no other strategies at their disposal because they had not been given any, either in their
initial training or by their employers through induction, in-service support or school
discipline policies. What they may need is what T7 called the cultural ‘in’, the ability to
access the local context, be it school, country or group, in such a way as makes sense to
the learners. This cultural ‘in’ applies equally to the world of teaching English to Young
Learners, how children learn and what they might achieve, and any information that can
help ease the new teacher into that culture should be welcomed.
Despite an apparent notion that seems to pervade the English Language Teaching
industry, that teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners is straightforward
and can be done by anyone with a rudimentary grasp of how to teach English as a foreign
language (Cameron, 2001), teaching children is not easy. As well as patience, energy and
stamina, working with children requires a range of occupational knowledge and skills
166
additional to those required to teach adults. These skills might include pacing and staging
learning activities for learners with shorter attention spans, communicating with Young
Learners and with parents whose language the teacher might not necessarily share,
adapting materials and making resources (Cameron, 2001; Moon, 2005; Pinter, 2006).
Young Learner English teachers may also need to feel comfortable singing songs,
engaging in art, crafts or sports, leading chants or using finger-puppets (T14), doing ‘silly
voices’ (T1) or playing with toys (T6). Not all teachers can do this, and not all want to.
On the other hand, some teachers may relish these challenges and the opportunities to
teach in a different way. They may also enjoy learning from experience and trying new
things and regard teaching Young Learners as a positive change, balancing the potentially
serious business of teaching adults who may be more focused, more demanding and more
obviously motivated with something lighter and more ‘fun.’ Teaching English to Young
Learners can be liberating if the teacher chooses to view it in such a light. Nonetheless,
even if the teacher is qualified and motivated, the challenges remain.
Motivating Young Learners attending out-of-school classes can be difficult.
Unlike adults, Young Learners have not necessarily chosen to attend after-school,
weekend of holiday English classes (Brewster, et al., 2002; Graves, 1996; Moon, 2000),
especially in an English as a Foreign Language context where they may lack a clear and
immediate need for the language (Lindstromberg, 2004; Puchta & Schratz, 1983). In
addition, some Young Learners may not have understood why they were in English
classes with T6, T7 or T8 while their friends were playing football. Furthermore, in some
cultures and contexts, out-of-school, extra or summer school classes could be associated
with punishment, personal failure or abandonment by the parent who wants somewhere
to leave the children while they are at work (T6). Any of these could explain the behaviour
of the girl sobbing in T7’s class, or the resentful attitudes of other teachers’ groups. In
addition, preparation for foreign language examinations such as Cambridge’s First
Certificate in English (FCE) might also affect motivation, particularly if the students can
see no real purpose in taking such an exam. They might prefer to spend the time preparing
for their school exams instead.
T11, a member of the interview sample, commented that Young Learner teachers
need “to be aware of fostering the desire to learn… making things hands-on and exciting.”
This suggests that teachers need a repertoire of motivational strategies and activities but,
in order to ‘foster the desire to learn,’ teachers might need some understanding of how
Young Learners learn and what might motivate them. Including this information in
course-books, teaching manuals and training courses might help them develop such an
167
understanding.
Rixon (1992) suggests that secondary school teachers tend to be subject-
specialists and primary teachers specialists in child development but this division appears
less common in private language centres. Data from this research seems to confirm this
view, where 95 per cent of teachers said they had taught both primary and secondary-age
children, with the majority age-groups being 9 to 14. Further, 48 per cent had taught Very
Young Learners, defined here as less than five years old. P29, in the pilot sample,
commented that “the experience of teaching below 11s and 15/16s can be very different…
and strategies have to be tweaked accordingly.” However, T9’s managers, claiming that
“all YLs are the same, aren’t they?” and that “if you can teach a 12 year old, you can
teach a 2 year old,” underscore the prevailing attitude in English Language Teaching
mentioned earlier, that learning to teach language is more challenging than learning how
to teach children, and this may help explain why the training seems to focus on the first
rather than the second (see 2.5 above).
T1, T2 and T3 are among the respondents in this research who claimed that
teaching teenagers is the same as teaching adults, perhaps because these teachers trained
to teach adults and feel more comfortable working with older children who, superficially,
resemble adult students. It is not. Teenagers have different social and emotional needs
from both adults and from younger children as they begin to assert their independence
from their parents and draw closer to their peer group (Coleman, 1994; Lewis, 2007;
Lindstromberg, 2004; Piaget, 1926; Puchta & Schratz, 1993). Some teenagers may appear
emotionally volatile, displaying anger or sadness, and may need their self-confidence and
self-esteem supported and nourished (Brewster, et al., 2002). Neither adults nor children,
“moody teenagers” (T3) can present an altogether different set of challenges, but in order
to meet those challenges, teachers need to be aware that teenagers do not necessarily have
the same requirements as either Young Learners or adults, and perhaps ought to be
approached as a distinct and unique group, with distinct and unique needs and interests.
Young Learners can find difficulty with some learning language activities such as
concentrated listening, reading and writing because they have not yet mastered those
skills in their own first language (Machura, 1991; Slaven & Slaven, 1991). In addition,
children appear to ‘tune in’ to different elements of language at different ages, with Very
Young Learners more receptive to sounds, Young Learners to meanings and systems and
teenagers to vocabulary (Aitchison, 1994). This presents an immediate challenge to the
teacher who may not share the child’s first language or have few, if any, strategies for
addressing this issue. This suggests that teachers need to know more about child learning
168
and development if they are to work across the whole age-range successfully. They also
need appropriate skills and strategies, and knowledge of child development may also help
with behaviour management, motivation, choosing materials, resources and activities,
and relating to Young Learners more generally.
Understanding the age-group, its needs, abilities and requirements, seems critical
to the design, development and selection of learning activities, materials and resources
(Holderness, 1991), especially where attention span might be a challenge (Brewster,
1991; Moon, 2000; Slaven & Slaven, 1991; Vassiliou, 2014). In order to address that
challenge, Young Learner teachers might use a range and variety of activities including
games, stories, songs, drama, mime, creative writing and rhymes (Brewster, et al., 2002;
Cameron, 2003; Hughes, 2001: Rixon, 1992). Three members of the interview sample,
T9, T13 and T14 enjoyed using games and songs to teach language, and valued this aspect
of Young Learner English Language Teaching very highly. All three said it made teaching
Young Learners more enjoyable than teaching adults, T13 saying she found herself
“reverting to being 8 again.” However, designing and leading such activities might
require specialist skills and knowledge that can only come from training.
Most teachers in the sample were using materials produced and published in the
United Kingdom. This may have several advantages. Such materials might be viewed as
more up-to-date or advanced (Rixon, 2000), independent, non-sectarian and politically
non-partisan because they are developed for an international market. On the other hand,
materials published in the United Kingdom might be viewed as reflecting or promoting
the values of that country and the consumerist Western lifestyle based on the capitalist
principles associated with it (Gray, 2010a/b). Whatever materials and activities are
selected, both designers and users may need an understanding of how and why they can
be used to stimulate, encourage and support learning (Brewster, et al., 2002; Leburn,
1991; Lewis, 2007; Pinter, 2006). Without such understanding, and without an awareness
of the possibilities afforded by picture-books, toys, songs, games and drama, teachers
might actually be producing materials that are just as unsuitable as those they are
supplementing or replacing.
6.1.3 The need for theory in English Language Teaching to Young Learners
Knowledge of universal theories of child development could be of long-term value to
Young Learner teachers, so their decisions are both age-appropriate and principled. 48
per cent of the research sample felt such theories ought to be part of a basic training
programme for Young Learner English Language teachers (see Table 10 above). Such
169
theories might include those of Piaget, Vygotsky and Bruner.
Piaget identified three stages of child development as children move from object
manipulation to classification to conceptualization (Donaldson, 1978), whilst Vygotsky
suggested that children can learn through play and social interaction (Williams and
Burden, 1997) and Bruner thought that learning could be supported through scaffolding,
or using routines, language-based encouragement and models (Brewster, et al., 2002).
That a planned, purposeful English lesson should provide opportunities for
learning to be scaffolded, and for children to learn together through interaction and play,
seems a fundamental tenet of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners,
as writers and teachers cited above seem to acknowledge. Awareness of these theories
can help a teacher plan and organize their lessons appropriately, but can also help them
understand learners’ behaviour better so they can manage it effectively. Such awareness
can also help in identifying and developing appropriate motivational strategies, especially
when working with different age-groups. In short, knowing these theories of child
learning and development can help teachers address the challenges discussed above, and
reduce the impact of culture shock.
Currently, however, training courses in teaching English to Young Learners
appear focused primarily on providing practical classroom experience rather than
knowledge of theory, although this may not be where the actual training need lies. Even
classroom experience gained in a training room could be too context-bound to be
transferrable, whereas child language learning and development theories might be
universally true and therefore universally applicable.
6.1.4 Summary
The four main challenges of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners in
private language centres in international contexts where the teachers are working outside
their home countries, are, according to this research:
1. managing Young Learner behaviour;
2. motivating Young Learners;
3. choosing appropriate materials and activities and
4. teaching a wide range of age groups.
In order to meet those challenges, teachers in this research sample appear to require the
following:
1. behaviour management and discipline techniques;
2. Young Learner motivational strategies across the 5 to 16 age range (what
170
motivates a 13 year old may not motivate a 7 year old);
3. knowledge of a range of activity types, materials and resources, and how to
develop their own in a principled way;
4. knowledge of key stages of child development to support principled application
of these techniques, skills and strategies across contexts and age-groups;
The members of this sample said these points should be included in Young Learner
English Language teacher training. A proposed framework for such a training module
based on those teachers’ recommendations is presented and discussed in 6.4 below.
6.2 Training and occupational development opportunities in teaching English as a
foreign language to Young Learners
Eraut remarks that “we never really learn something until we have to teach it” (1994, p.
35). Learning how to teach whilst teaching may have a place in the development of a
teacher’s occupational skills and knowledge but “the trauma of being thrown unprepared
into a full classroom situation is not calculated to ensure any kind of rational professional
development” (Wallace, 1991, p. 89). Sketchley was “shown the classroom and told ‘you
are the teacher, so teach’… with very little advice by… management” (2013, p. 18).
Hobbs (2013) recounts a number of “‘horror stories’ about overseas ELT jobs where the
employer, in most cases a private language centre, offered no support and no opportunities
for professional development” (p. 171), noting that “few employers provide the
professional development novice teachers require” (p. 172). In this research, 85 per cent
of the sample had no pre-service training in how to teach English as a foreign language
to Young Learners (Figure 9 above), 31 per cent received no practical support (Figure 10
above) and 59 per cent felt underprepared (Figure 11 above), particularly in matters such
as managing behaviour, teaching a wide range of age groups and planning lessons. These
teachers had to train themselves in their own classrooms, and, through a combination of
reading, talking to colleagues and actually working with children, construct their own
theoretical knowledge-base. This may have an advantage of being authentic, since
constructed individually with real learners in real contexts, but the possible disadvantage
of being untransferrable across contexts, unless the teacher is able to extract key truths
from the experience and identify ways of applying those truths to other children in other
classrooms. Some knowledge of theory might help in that process.
171
6.2.1 The theorizing practitioner
Block, Gray and Holborow (2012) see the teacher as “a theorizing practitioner whose
practice is informed by theory (rather than just by subject knowledge and skills in the
effective delivery of lessons)” (p. 142). One advantage of this is that “well educated,
informed teachers are able to use abstract knowledge (such as the construct of formal
schemata) in making classroom decisions to improve their teaching” (Bailey, 1997, p. 8).
Another is that they can transfer knowledge, and skills, to other classrooms.
Borg (2013), Bowen and Marks (1994), Eraut (1994), Hargreaves and Goodson
(1996) and Wallace (1991) report that some teachers appear sceptical of academic theory
and feel theory and practice, academics and teachers, should be kept separate (Senior,
2006; Ur, 1992) but Britten (1988), Hargreaves (1984), Kennedy (1989) and Wideen,
Mayer-Smith and Moon (1996) are among those writers who suggest an engagement with
theory can make teachers not only open to new ideas but also facilitate and support
change. An understanding of Young Learner language learning theory might, then, help
teachers who are required to change age-group, change centre, change job or change
country. Theory might inform and underpin practice and help the lessons learned from
that practice become globally transferrable.
This kind of practitioner, however, may not meet the requirements of the industry,
which is “a workforce capable of delivering a standardized product into the educational
marketplace… young migrant workers with qualifications such as the CELTA” (Block
and Gray, 2015, p. 11). “Such teachers,” they say, “are frequently poorly paid, they tend
not to be unionized and their contracts are short-term.” Whilst this may minimize costs
and maintain English Language Teaching as a permeable, flexible occupation, it may not
be conducive to occupational development or growth (Kennedy, 1989) or to the reflection
on experience required to feed that growth (Bailey, 1997; Moon, 1999). It may also serve
to ‘de-professionalize’ teaching itself.
The divorce of theory from practice in teaching English as a foreign language
(Kennedy, 1989) and suspicion of academia (Bowen & Marks, 1994; Ur, 1992) suggests
the specialist expertise of many in this field might be built on flimsy foundations.
Specialists are defined by the British Council (2014c) as “leading and advising… on
policy and practice and likely to have specialisms, e.g. management, materials writing,
early literacy and methodology.” The lack of theory and the revelation of this research
(Figure 3 above) that around a fifth of teachers entered the industry with no pre-service
training at all. In Young Learner English teaching this rises to 85 per cent (Figure 9
above). This calls into question the professional basis of the industry, particularly since it
172
seems involve largely untrained novices being ‘thrown in at the deep end’ with minimal
classroom-based training and expected to learn for themselves, ‘on the job’ and from ‘trial
and error’.
This may be particularly acute in the many commercially run private language
centres which require, for survival, “a largely casualized labour force… with [no] more
than a few weeks’ of training” (Gray, 2010a, p. 181). In this sector, pressure to maximize
income or increase profits can lead some owner-managers to recruit too many students.
In the interview sample, T5, for instance, worked in which enrolled twice the numbers it
had planned for, and consequently had to recruit unqualified teachers at very short notice
to cover the classes, whilst T6 had to teach Very Young Learners because the centre’s
owners decided to add those classes to their portfolio as an expansion of the business.
Perhaps it is inevitable that, in a globalized, competitive industry like English Language
Teaching, the concerns and pressures of the language provision market outweigh issues
such as academic standards or educational integrity.
Phillipson (1992) expresses concern over “the rapid elevation to expert status of
many native speakers of English, after a limited period of teaching experience… with a
strong likelihood that this experience was [gained] outside any education system” (p.
254). This research seemed to confirm his concerns by finding that most Young Learner
English language teachers had worked (Figure 25 above) as materials writers (88 per
cent), course developers (78 per cent) and teacher trainers (72 per cent). Only 40 per cent
had any training for these roles (Figure 26 above), and no experience of teaching outside
the English Language Teaching industry, with only 10 per cent coming into this from
previous teaching careers (Figure 1 above).
Whilst the nature of these roles can change from context to context, all involve
one teacher transferring his or her knowledge to others and appear to be personally and
occupationally meaningful. Materials are meant to be used in classrooms. Supervisors
observe and give feedback in the hope it will help the observee improve. Managers help
devise job plans and set targets. Trainers train teachers. These are responsible positions
requiring a number of skills, not least an ability to manage other people, yet this survey
indicates little training for these roles, underlining points made by Cameron (2003),
Hughes and Williams (1998), Impey and Underhill (1994), and Rixon (1992). As shown
in Figure 26 above, only 40 per cent had some training for these roles, although 21 per
cent had mentors to guide them. The self-trained practitioner seems to return as a
recurring theme in English Language Teaching generally and teaching English Language
to Young Learners particularly, with the majority apparently training themselves through
173
reading up on the subject and learning from experience whilst doing the job.
One problem with promotion in the teaching English to Young Learners area of
the industry is that it often seems based on classroom experience alone. It may also be a
consequence of an absence of other suitable candidates (Cameron, 2003; Rixon, 1992).
A member of the pilot sample, P14, had already performed all the roles suggested in the
questionnaire in her first four years in the industry. She was in the 20-29 age-group and
still in her first post and centre. She had received no training for any of these roles, and
yet she was doing all of them, including training other teachers. It might be suggested that
her practical teaching experience, her occupational perspective and her Personal Practical
Knowledge might, perhaps, be somewhat limited yet she is training and managing other
teachers and has only the perspective offered by one context. She has no qualifications
other than a Cambridge Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA).
But P14 is not atypical in this industry. English Language Teaching, and the specialist
area of Teaching English to Young Learners, offer rapid routes for progression for
ambitious people. However, just because a classroom teacher gets positive feedback from
students does not mean they will be a good syllabus designer, an effective line-manager
or a successful trainer. Classroom experience in itself may not be enough to develop a
teacher.
6.2.2 Training opportunities for Young Learner English teachers
P34, in the pilot sample, stated, “teaching YLs requires more skills and professional
training than teaching adults.” It may, in addition, require a different theoretical
knowledge-base. The Cambridge CELTA is not a course in teaching English to Young
Learners, as the name of the course makes clear, nor is it particularly theoretical (Block
& Gray, 2015), though it might be developed to include something more substantial than
a forty-five minute addendum of games and songs at the end of the final day when trainees
are awaiting their results.
Kerr (1996, p. 93) suggests that the dual purpose of training is to provide security
and certainty, the “confidence to make decisions in the classroom [and to] equip trainees
to learn from experience,” to challenge received wisdom and to experiment with methods
and models. Without this ability to challenge and experiment, he suggests, no
development is possible. However, “many teacher training courses aim at security at the
expense of future development” (ibid., p. 93) and the Cambridge Certificate in English
Language Teaching to Adults seems to aim at producing teachers “whose horizons do not
extend beyond the micro-context of the classroom” (Block & Gray, 2015, p. 8).
174
This generic, one-size-fits-all training course appears to be rooted in a “conviction
that the underlying theories of language and language learning [are] ‘scientific’ and hence
largely unaffected by local variables” such as context (Howatt, 2004, p. 301) but, because
teaching is highly contextualized, Bowen and Marks (1994) take a view that only the
teacher in his or her specific context knows what works best in that context. In short, one-
size-fits-one whilst practice, they say, is a “collision of (personal) theories, training,
reading, exchanging ideas” drawn from a lifetime of observation and experience (p. 11).
Short, generalized training courses like those offered by Cambridge English and
Trinity College might not be able to prepare teachers for every possible contextual
difference nor allow time for reflection, experimentation or diversification from received
models. Although the Trinity Certificate and Cambridge Certificate in English Language
Teaching to Adults (CELTA) provide what Edwards (1996) and Brandt (2006a) call sets
of core techniques and survival skills that might prepare people to start teaching as soon
as possible, Hobbs (2013) claims that the CELTA in particular does not provide trainees
with the ability to think independently or critically about teaching and teaching contexts.
She, like Ferguson and Donno (2003), suggests that the techniques and skills imparted by
CELTA may not be readily transferrable and that training needs to prepare teachers to be
flexible, to be able to adapt their training, and to move away from what Senior (2006)
calls the ‘CELTA way’ to an English Language Teaching way. This does not apply just
to teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners. It may also apply to
identifying a teaching methodology appropriate for the teacher’s context (Holliday,
2005). This may be why awareness of other possible models, and of theories of teaching
and learning, could be included in such training courses. It would widen the knowledge-
base and give beginning teachers a foundation from which they can make reasoned,
informed decisions appropriate to their own contexts. Knowing why may ultimately be
more valuable than simply knowing how. The Cambridge CELTA, its Young Learner
extension and the plethora of in-house courses do not seem designed to encourage that
kind of development, focusing as they apparently do, on the technical issue of lesson
planning. However, they do provide platforms from which teachers might begin.
Nonetheless, some members of the interview sample, such as T2, T3 and T8
identified which activities they learned on their initial certificate courses might be adapted
for younger learners, and seemed flexible and imaginative enough to make this work.
Other teachers, such as T1, T15 and T16, felt they were unable to do the same, claiming
that CELTA had an ‘A’ (T7) for a reason. T15 and T16 disliked teaching Young Learners
very much, T15 because she was untrained and T16 because he did not like working with
175
children. This last is a fundamental point of difference between mainstream education
and private language centre English Language Teaching. Teachers in schools, one would
assume, choose to teach children. English as a foreign language teachers might not.
A training course allows teachers to make mistakes but also to experiment with
being teacher without the need to write whole courses, assess learners’ work and make
decisions on progress or course materials without the need to be accountable to parents.
This changes once the certificate has been issued, the trainee has been appointed into a
job and is dispatched to the classroom for the very first lesson as an independent,
autonomous teacher. A number of writers suggest that this transition from trainee to
teacher can be stressful (Emery, 2012; Garton, et al., 2011; Numrich, 1996; Senior, 2006;
Tsui, 2003; Veenman, 1984) and that employers can support this transition through
immediate, localized training (Borg, 2003; Hall, 2011; Richards, 1998) of the sort offered
to T8 and by T5, both members of the interview sample, as well as to 58 per cent of the
questionnaire sample (Figure 10 above) and/or induction and probation (Impey &
Underhill, 1994).
This study found an inconsistent approach, however, across the industry and
within networks themselves. Some teachers have probationary periods (75 per cent of this
sample, Figure 24 above), job plans (82 per cent of this sample, Figure 23 above), reduced
hours, in-house training and mentors whilst other centres in the same network and the
same country provide nothing. This implies the level of support for new teachers and the
quality of in-service training and development depends on an individual centre manager’s
priorities rather than on a universal recognition of a need. In this study, around a third of
the sample had no support or training in their first year.
Moving from training to teaching, however, can also be an exciting experience.
Liberated from the checklists, form-filling and need for the display teaching of supervised
practice, some teachers can implement immediately their own ideas and plans. The
training course can be perceived by some as restricting their creativity although it is a
necessary means to an end, in this case the certificate that secures a job. Once in that job,
some teachers, seeing the limitations of their training, can develop their own approaches
quickly, particularly if they are in a context which encourages diversity and individuality.
The transition from trainee to teacher can be both exciting and liberating, and self-
identification as a teacher may contribute to the development of feelings of self-worth
and self-esteem because teaching is, in some cultures, still a highly regarded occupation
with teachers viewed as valuable members of a community rather than as casual, easily
replaceable labour. Teachers who feel undervalued, or exploited, or taken for granted,
176
may be less likely to perform well, could lose interest and motivation and might even
leave for something different, taking their skills and knowledge with them.
6.2.3 Opportunities for occupational teacher development
One means of maintaining interest and motivation is through training and occupational
development (Enever, 2011; Hargreaves, 1994), which can increase knowledge for the
job (Richards & Farrell, 2005) and provide stimulation, motivation and reward (Eraut,
1994; Praver & Baldwin, 2008). Teachers in this sample (Figure 20 above) were offered
observations (89 per cent), in-service training workshops (84 per cent) and funding for
further training or academic study (71 per cent). As the most significant contribution to
personal and occupational development (Figure 19 above), respondents cited the
Cambridge Diploma in English Language Teaching to Adults (DELTA) (43 per cent) and
they most valued (Figure 21 above) talking to colleagues (86 per cent), trying out new
activities (84 per cent) and training courses (57 per cent). 78 per cent of teachers reported
they were given opportunities for informal discussion with colleagues (Figure 20 above),
perhaps in staff meetings, and such informal peer interaction appears to be a valued form
of input for the occupational development of teachers of English as a foreign language
(Brewster, et al., 2002; Crookes, 2009; Eraut, 1994; Head & Taylor, 1997; Senior, 2006).
Chatting with colleagues at the water cooler or in the staff room cannot, however,
be the only sources for a teacher’s development. The experiences of colleagues may be
filtered through personal perceptions, beliefs and biases. Subsequent reflections on and
reports of those experiences may be distorted as a result. The quality and veracity of a
colleague’s testimony may be inconsistent. People exaggerate. Just because one teacher
says a class is badly behaved does not make it true for all teachers. As Hargreaves and
Goodson (1996) indicate, this type of subjective experience is only as useful as the context
and perhaps the person sharing it. The same may be true for classroom experience, and
the most popular forms of occupational teacher development offered by centres in this
research, top-down observation and in-service training workshops.
Some writers question the value of in-service training workshops where what is
learned proves untransferrable (Lamb, 1995; Tomlinson, 1988). This seems to be echoed
by this research, where a large majority of teachers in this research (76 per cent) said the
training workshop must be relevant, practical and immediately applicable to their
classroom (Figure 22 above) and only 4 per cent wanted training workshops to focus on
theory. Only 4 per cent of teachers indicated that an in-service training workshop had
177
provided their most memorable teacher development experiences (Figure 19 above) and
some (T11 and T12) indicated they had found training workshops a waste of time.
T10 suggested that some workshop leaders are motivated by personal
advancement, and pilot member P20’s dismissal of in-service training workshops as
opportunities for colleagues to expound their own opinions indicate other potential issues
with in-service training. Furthermore, the success a workshop might be influenced by the
quality of the people delivering it, since few trainers of teachers of English as a foreign
language have received any training themselves (Hughes & Williams, 1998). T9, for
instance, planned and delivered in-service training workshops on aspects of teaching
English to Young Learners based on his specialist MA degree and teaching experience.
He said he did not really know what he was doing, but he “did it all the same.”
The teacher development activity most frequently used, non-participant
observation and feedback, may be similarly compromised, by the quality of the observers
and/or the purpose of the observation, particularly if the observer has not been trained or
lacks the subject-knowledge to offer informed insights into teaching practice. As a
quality-control mechanism, an observer may not get an accurate picture of a teacher’s
ability if that teacher delivers a ‘display lesson’ intended to impress the observer or meet
some pre-determined assessment criteria. Perhaps the feedback is not particularly
developmental. A teacher may feel the observer has not focused on the right areas or is
using the observation as an exercise to meet the requirements of an external accreditation
body. Observation can be stressful, if the purpose is evaluative or unclear, but can also be
intrusive and disruptive and a waste of time. Participant observation in the form of team-
teaching may be a better option (Head & Taylor, 1997), allowing as it might a greater
degree of mutual involvement in the planning and delivery of the lesson and giving both
parties an equal stake in its success or failure. In addition, it enables both parties to
observe each other, equalizing the status, minimizing the stress and becoming,
potentially, mutually developmental as participants learn from each other.
Another option is to send teachers on training courses (Senior, 2006). Some
centres organize internal training but those that do not have the resources or opportunities
to offer these in-house must seek external providers of those course, and possibly even
fund their teachers’ attendance. That the larger networks are able to do this may explain
why 86 per cent of the questionnaire sample now have a Cambridge CELTA or Trinity
College Certificate, 71 per cent a Cambridge Diploma, 45 per cent a qualification in
teaching English to Young Learners and 43 per cent Masters’ degrees (Table 7 above).
These are, however, big, global organizations with thousands of fee-paying students. 87
178
per cent of this sample work for large global providers of English Language Teaching
who have the resources to provide such programmes (item 7). The situation may be very
different in smaller, more commercially focused language schools “run out of the owner’s
house” (T8) that many newly qualified teachers work for (Hobbs, 2013; Senior, 2006).
For example, the centre in which pilot sample member P10 works is still establishing
itself and does not yet have the resources to provide an occupational teacher development
programme.
Tighter financial margins and fewer teachers may mean they are reluctant or
unable to release teachers from the classroom, or have little money to subscribe to journals
or pay visiting trainers. In addition, where there is a frequent turnover of teachers on short
contracts of nine months or less, centres may feel investment in training and teacher
development is not worthwhile (Johnston, 1997). One implication of this for a global
industry could be a proliferation of under-trained teachers moving from country to
country diluting and undermining not only the quality of English Language teaching to
Young Learners but also its status, as such practitioners compromise the industry’s
integrity (Holliday, 2005). Ultimately, those employers committed to a teacher
development programme will organize one, while the others will not (Ferguson & Donno,
2003), yet even in these contexts, development happens, informally and naturally, from
experience and from trying new things. Although 84 per cent rated trying out new ideas
and activities as either very useful (Figure 21), reinforcing points made by Willis and
Willis (1996) on the value of learning from experimentation, this type of experiential
learning might be too context-bound to be truly valuable.
Experience, because it shapes and informs understanding might be developmental
(Borg, 2003), yet experience alone might actually limit understanding if it is interpreted
solely through an individual’s pre-existing belief system (Eraut, 1994). Freeman (2002)
writes of the ‘insulation of experience’ where some teachers may not engage with
occupational development activities or with their colleagues on the grounds that they can
learn nothing from such an engagement. Nonetheless, experience may help people
recognize and acknowledge their limitations (Senior, 2006) and understand why some
situational knowledge, skills and techniques may be untransferrable or inappropriate to
some other contexts.
Decisions grounded in knowledge might stem from training that offers a blend of
theory and practice so that, teachers have a foundation to support them if things do not
work and a base on which to build in a new context (Britten, 1988; Hargreaves, 1984;
Senior, 2006). Such a blend may also, perhaps, help teachers develop their own
179
occupational knowledge, defined by Wideen, Mayer-Smith and Moon (1996) as “that
combination of formal and personal and practical knowledge on which teachers base their
practice” (p. 192). This Personal Practical Knowledge can come from several sources,
from trainers, from colleagues, from employers and from reflection on experience
(Golombek, 1998) and can help teachers make more informed decisions. However,
teachers may need to be shown how to reflect on experience and how to assimilate theory
into practice, and this might be covered on the pre-service training courses.
6.2.4 Summary
Getting a job in English Language Teaching, and in teaching English as a foreign
language to Young Learners, may be easy. One needs no real qualifications or training,
just the flexibility and willingness to travel. Once inside the industry, there appear to be
a number of options for advancement and many teachers take on extra responsibilities in
materials writing, course development, training or management. However, it seems that
no training is required for these roles either. There are, though, numerous opportunities
for personal development, ranging from in-service training workshops and observations
to attending conferences and reading journals, and teachers appear to be able to choose
their own preferred pathways. This means that every practitioner will have a unique
Personal Practical Knowledge and this might enrich the industry in a way that a more
homogenized training and development programme could not. Nevertheless, for some
teachers the Cambridge Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA) or
Trinity College Certificate might be the only training course they will ever do,
observation and feedback the only occupational development activity they will ever
engage in. A balance may need to be achieved. One way of attempting this is to change
the basic entry-level training to include more on managing future development.
6.3 Meeting challenges and pursuing opportunities in teaching English as a foreign
language to Young Learners
In addressing Research Question 3, this section considers aspects of teachers’ motivation
and attitudes towards teaching English to Young Learners and how these have been
influenced by occupational teacher development and training opportunities. It also
explores some theories of career development and discusses how the process of entering
a new culture can be eased by induction and knowledge, culture not only being the
customs and traditions of a country but also of a language centre, a class and of English
Language Teaching to Young Learners itself.
180
6.3.1 Reflections on attitude and experience in new cultures
Piaget’s suggestion that knowledge is neither external nor innate but something
individuals need to construct for themselves from their own, individual and personal
interaction with the world (Donaldson, 1978) and Vygotsky’s notion (1978) that learning
involves being able to transfer old knowledge to new situations in order to create new
knowledge indicate that people learn from both experience and experiment. Teachers
seem to evolve through a synthesis of attitude and motivation, practical experience and
training, which leads to the creation of a Personal Practical Knowledge. However,
experience and knowledge without reflection and action will not, in themselves, lead to
meaningful development (McDrury & Alterio, 2003). Reflection is a key part of the
experiential learning cycle (Kolb, 1984) and might help fuse the other aspects together.
Reflection, however, may be a skill in itself which needs to be taught and developed
alongside others, perhaps during an initial training course, perhaps through some sort of
structured development plan, and perhaps teachers need introducing to models such as
Kolb’s if they are to make sense and effective use of the concept. However, benefitting
from experience and reflection-on-experience may depend on the level of commitment to
the job on the part of both teacher and centre management.
Day (2004) suggests that commitment is nurtured by a combination of “job
satisfaction, morale, motivation and identity, and [is also] a predictor of teachers’ work
performance, absenteeism, burn-out and turnover” (p. 62), but commitment can mean
different things to different people. “In order to teach effectively,” he continues,
“Teachers must not only feel psychologically and emotionally ‘comfortable’, they must
also have some sense of belief that they can make a difference” (ibid., p. 78). When they
lose this belief and when they feel unfulfilled, teachers will experience a decrease in
motivation.
The findings reported in Figure 28 above seems to suggest that most respondents
have a positive attitude towards teaching English as a foreign language to Young
Learners, with prompts such as ‘fun’, ‘rewarding’ and ‘positively challenging’ more
frequently checked than ‘boring’ or ‘negatively challenging’. The data presented in
Figures 15 and 16 above suggests that most teachers became more positive about teaching
English to Young Learners with the benefit of greater experience (81 per cent), more
training (60 per cent) and more knowledge (60 per cent), resulting in greater confidence,
a 12 per cent increase in positive attitudes and a 10 per cent decrease in negative attitudes.
Attitudes towards English Language Teaching to Young Learners appeared to
change during a teacher’s career as a result of greater experience, more training and more
181
understanding and awareness of Young Learners themselves, although more teachers
seemed to enjoy their early experiences than not, with only 12 per cent saying they hated
it (Figure 12 above). Members of the interview sample attributed their problems to lack
of formal training but there may also be a lack of confidence with children underlying
their fears that training might not have addressed anyway. This may be a personality issue
rather than a knowledge or training one. T13, in the interview sample, felt that personality
was a critical element of success in the Young Learner classroom and suggested it might
compensate for a lack of training. Faced with the challenge of entering the unknown world
of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners, teachers like T13 and T14,
untrained and unprepared, saw this as an opportunity to experience somewhere different
and approached it as they would a journey to a new country. Both teachers have worked
in Spain for several years, although T14 has also worked in Japan, and both enjoy
travelling. The world of Young Learner English Language Teaching became, perhaps,
another culture for them to explore, with its own folk-lore, traditions, behaviours and
icons.
Whilst encountering a new culture can be challenging, it can also be exciting, and
the step from training room to teaching centre equally exciting. Teaching English as a
foreign language to Young Learners too, whilst potentially daunting, can provide teachers
with rewarding, stimulating and memorable experiences. Working out what to teach and
how to do it, especially without training, can also be exciting and it is clearly possible for
teachers without formal training to deliver excellent lessons. Indeed it might be suggested
that a lack of preconceived assumptions can be liberating. For every sick or terrified
teacher there may be an excited or stimulated one. The issue may lie, therefore, less with
formal training and more with a willingness to engage, and the data presented in Figure
16 above indicates that teachers’ changing attitudes may be influenced less by formal
training and more by greater practical experience and the confidence that may grow from
that.
As Figure 1 above showed, 47 per cent of teachers of English as a foreign
language in this study came from non-teaching jobs, such as retailing, office
administration or clerical/secretarial, and 41 per cent were students. None of the teachers
surveyed by Bailey (1997), Johnston (1997) and Tsui (2003) chose English Language
Teaching as a first-choice career. This seems to suggest that this may be either a second
(or third) career or something to do before settling down to a ‘real’ job after university
(Cresswell-Turner, 2004; Maley, 1992; Meddings, 2004; Senior, 2006), a point made by
both T6 and T7 in the interview sample who just wanted to get away from the United
182
Kingdom for a while. This implies that the attraction of teaching English as a foreign
language may be less the teaching, therefore, and more the opportunity to experience life
in a different culture or to escape that of the home country.
Some people have a curiosity about other cultures which can fuel a desire to travel
but also a desire to engage with people from those cultures. This may broaden horizons,
enrich minds and develop individuals. These people can, in turn, enrich their students’
lives by bringing new and different experiences, perspectives and cultural influences to
their lessons and this, as Day (2004) suggests, can be highly motivating. It may be one
positive aspect of pursuing English Language Teaching as a career. In addition, the
industry seems able to embrace all kinds of people, of all ages and from all backgrounds,
as Maley (1992) and Senior (2006) suggest. For some, working and living in a different
culture can change outlooks, perspectives, goals and priorities. Whether this is a positive
or negative experience may depend on the situation and the context, on the job and the
centre. A supportive manager and a rewarding job in which teachers feel respected,
intellectually stimulated and emotionally satisfied can provide a positive, motivating
experience that outweighs financial reward (Senior, 2006). For some, this may be enough.
The majority of the interview sample expected to remain as English Language
teachers for the foreseeable future. Whilst some had permanent posts in United Kingdom
universities, others in the interview sample such as T10, T11, T12, T13 and T14 were
returning to posts in other countries and looking to develop themselves in those places.
58 per cent of the questionnaire sample became language teachers in order to live
in a foreign country (Figure 2 above). Of this sample, only 14 per cent indicated they
wanted to leave the English Language Teaching industry (Figure 27 above), with the
remaining 86 per cent looking to develop their teaching within it (12 per cent), move into
the roles described above of trainer (14 per cent) or materials writer (12 per cent) or
remain where they were (13 per cent). This suggests a sample that is still finding sufficient
challenge, opportunities and interest in teaching to maintain their commitment to the job.
6.3.2 Career cycles and possible pathways
Just as teachers need an awareness of the culture into which they are journeying, and the
behavioural expectations that underpin it (Holliday, 2005; Senior, 2006), so they also
need to know how to assimilate that awareness into practice. Context matters, and cultural
awareness is essential. This is not just national and local beliefs, customs, values and
expectations. It is also the culture of the teaching centre itself, from how to get one’s
photocopying done to whether one can take a cup of coffee into a classroom. This differs
183
across networks and within countries. Each centre is unique, because its combination of
company policies, occupational experience and knowledge, personal values and management
ethos will be unique. In addition, most classrooms differ from each other because of their
dynamics and personalities, and a management technique which works in one country,
one centre or even one classroom may fail in another (McKay, 1992). A knowledge of
child development and language learning theories, an ability to evaluate materials and
teaching and learning activities, and an understanding of why particular tasks, materials
and activities are appropriate for which ages and developmental stages forms the
knowledge-base from which principled, informed decisions might be made, and,
crucially, enable teachers to adapt their knowledge to new contexts or correct their
practice when things are not working (Senior, 2006). It is less what is done but why it is
done that seems important here. What may work only once. Why may work more than
once. With a knowledge of theory to inform and underpin practice, skills may become
both readily adaptable and easily transferrable after all (Hughes & Williams, 2007) and
support the development of the teacher and his or her career.
A number of career-theory models might be applied to members of this research
sample. In the teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners strand of the
English Language Teaching industry, a five-stage model of preparation, appointment,
induction, in-service and transition proposed by Bolam (1990) may apply to members of
this research sample, with a number phase-switching (Fessler, 1995) as they move in and
out of different roles and stages. Teachers travel, according to Veenman (1984), through
three main stages, the first focused on their own classroom, the second on their institution
and the third on their students, moving from self to situation to student, yet each time a
new stage begins, the individual may return to the state of novice. In addition, the model
of culture shock outlined by Brown (2000), of insecurity, acceptance and assimilation,
might be applied in this instance, as people orientate themselves in new contexts to face
new challenges. In a language centre, this could be a teacher taking on the challenge of
writing generic materials for a group of classes, or becoming an external examiner, or co-
ordinating the use of learning technology, anything that involves extending the current
set of responsibilities to include new ones, or changing role altogether. In terms of
Pennington’s 1995 ladder of occupationally meaningful events described in Table 2
above (in 3.5), this would involve contributing to teacher development by mentoring a
new teacher, or contributing to the Young Learner English Language Teaching
community by writing an article in a magazine such as C&Ts, published by the IATEFL
Young Learner and Teenagers Special Interest Group.
184
It seems that every mini-cycle may be revisited and replayed each time the
teacher’s role changes. The journey from beginner to expert appears to be an
accumulation of knowledge and is experienced in each new context. Careers may actually
be sequences of related job-cycles, each one bringing culture shock and a cycle of
changing concerns, with initiation, idealism, uncertainty and adjustment witnessed every
time a teacher phase-switches. Thus instead of a career pathway, we might perhaps be
looking at a career-cycle consisting of many mini-cycles, or even a spiral, for it seems
that each project, each job, each task may follow the same spiral structure within the
greater career spiral with each new phase requiring a re-set. One might be competent in
one field in one context only to find that one is less competent elsewhere even in the same
field. A teacher will bring to each phase some knowledge that will inform initial actions
but those actions, as they are reflected upon, will feed back into and grow the knowledge-
base so that the next action will be more informed than the last, and so on in a repeating
spiral. Each time a new stage or context is entered, or a new role undertaken, the teacher
in effect begins again as a novice, albeit an informed one, and needs to develop the skills
and knowledge-base to enable them to become experts in that role. The need for change,
or development to the next phase, project, job and role may come as the cycle of the spiral
ends, when the teacher has mastered a particular role or task and synthesized new
knowledge and experience into their schemata, in other words when they have finished
learning in this particular context. This can apply to a three month project, a one year
contract or a twenty year career.
These mini-cycles in the spiral might reflect the Zones of Proximal Development
posited by Vygotsky (1978). Here the mediator or scaffolder that supports the individual’s
move from one zone or cycle to another might be a training course, teacher development,
a mentor, an academic qualification or a research project. This could also reflect the
notion of a more competent individual providing comprehensible input at a level slightly
above that of the learner (L+1) being essential to language acquisition and learning
(Krashen, 1985). Again, the L+1 might be a training course, journal article or workshop,
something that contributes new information to aid the construction of new knowledge in
a helical combination of attitude or motivation, experience, reflection and knowledge,
without which development might, possibly, not occur.
Each time these practitioners move to a new stage they carry their previous
knowledge and experience with them. It informs and enriches what they do. However,
they may, in the process, experience insecurity, uncertainty and doubt as they move into
and through a new developmental cycle. The input of a mediator might help to ease that
185
transition and support the creation and assimilation of new knowledge into the existing
framework.
In this study, most teachers took on additional roles whilst maintaining a presence
in the classroom, thus allowing them to experiment and pilot ideas with actual students
and deepening their understanding of the mechanics of teaching, both theory and practice,
perhaps moving towards the ‘theorizing practitioner’ status preferred by Block, Gray and
Holborow (2012). The successful negotiation of a pathway into and through the culture
of teaching may require the risk-taking of experimentation, the reflective evaluation of
that experiment and the theoretical knowledge-base into which it can be assimilated, the
Personal Practical Knowledge that is unique to each teacher and essential for those
teachers performing their roles successfully. Negotiating the pathway may also require a
guide. This might be a mentor, a workshop, a training course or a text-book.
6.3.3 The position of non-native English speaker teachers
In addition to the culture of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners,
the micro-culture of individual language centre, the particular classroom, group and group
dynamic and the macro-culture of the host-country, Non-Native Speaker Teachers
(NNESTs) may face a further challenge, that of being a non-native speaker in an industry
where native speakers appear highly valued commodities and are marketed as part of the
product or service parents are buying, for, despite the fact that the majority of English
language speakers have learned the language rather than acquired it as native speakers
(Bourne, 1996; Gray, 2010a; Hall, 2011; Holborow, 1999), the language that most
learners want to learn remains Standard English, or English as a Native Language (Hall,
2011). Textbooks portray native speaker lifestyles and language varieties (Gray, 2010a;
Hall, 2011; Valdes, 1986) and consequently native speaker teachers may be more highly
sought than non-native speakers (Block & Cameron, 2002). Singh and Han note the
employment of unqualified native speakers suggests a strong market-value for Standard
English, a market-value seemingly perpetuated by the industry itself through the
International English Language Testing System (IELTS) examinations, the course-books
and textbooks around which curricula might be constructed and the actual type of English
taught (Hall, 2011; Holborow, 1999).
Holliday (2005) claims that non-native English speaker teachers, suffering from
a perception that they are less proficient English users, may need to assert their status as
teachers more frequently than native speakers. The non-native English speaker, called
‘the schizophrenic teacher’ by Medgyes because they are both teacher and learner
186
simultaneously, is, “more than any native speaker… aware of the difficulties the students
are likely to encounter and the possible errors they are likely to make… [and] therefore…
has easier access to the measures and techniques which may facilitate the students’
learning” (1982, p. 6). In other words, the non-native English speaker ought to be in a
comparatively strong position because she, like the students, has had to learn English as
a foreign language, possibly even using the same materials and approaches, possibly, in
some cases, in the same institution or context. The non-native speaker may have insights
into the English-language learning process that a native speaker might not share.
In addition, a shift in power to the non-native English speaker teacher may be
valuable to an employing organization. “In political terms, it is evident that British
Council ideologues are pursuing this liberal line of reasoning partly because… such
strategic positioning promises the larger market share for the British Council in the new
era” (Modiano, 2001, p. 342). Cultural diversity and equal opportunities may, it seems,
be marketable commodities in themselves. Nonetheless, many non-native English
speaker teachers can feel insecure, about their pronunciation, for example, their command
of idioms and their knowledge of socio-cultural aspects of language. Medgyes (op. cit.)
even suggests some can “suffer from a harrowing sense of guilt for something they are
not to be blamed for; both have been chasing something they do not have the slightest
chance of catching, that is, a native-like command of English” (p. 5).
Whilst this research did not focus explicitly on the challenges facing non-native
English speaker teachers specifically, 10 did contribute to the questionnaire research,
comprising 7 per cent of the sample, whilst one member of the interview sample was a
non-native English speaker. He (T4) suggested that the biggest challenge he faced as a
Spanish national teaching English in France and then in the United Kingdom was a feeling
of insecurity over his knowledge of the language and of his pronunciation. That he was
not a trained teacher of English to Young Learners intensified this insecurity. He
commented that the Spanish equivalent of the United Kingdom’s Postgraduate Certificate
in Education (PGCE), which confers Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) on its recipients and
which is the training course he had done, contained no observed teaching practice at all,
consisting solely of lectures on methodology.
The questionnaires returned by the non-native English speaker teachers yielded
no clear, consistent pattern of response. They were received from a range of countries.
Two Spanish teachers were working in the United Kingdom, a Greek teacher was working
in Kuwait, a Portuguese teacher was based in Malaysia, a Malaysian teacher was in Sri
Lanka and a Maltese teacher was in Singapore. This indicates that English Language
187
Teaching, as a career, does facilitate global mobility and the travel-teach motive was also
present in the non-native English speaker mini-sample. Such practitioners also appeared
to have high levels of motivation and job satisfaction. None said they wanted to leave the
English Language Teaching industry. In fact most said they wanted to develop their
teaching, get more qualifications or be promoted into other roles. Two said they wanted
to move to new countries.
Why these individuals chose to work for foreign-owned private language centres
was not asked but factors might include salary, status (working for the British Council,
for example), working conditions, for example smaller classes, and the opportunity to
undertake different types of English language teaching, such as English for Business and
teaching adults. There is also, with international organizations, the possibility of
international experience and promotion into other roles. R146, for example, has managed
Young Learner assessment, been a mentor and co-ordinator and led in-service training
workshops and R158 is a teacher trainer. Nevertheless, some, like T4 and R2 in the
questionnaire sample, remain acutely aware of their ‘lesser statuses’ despite the
inclusivity, diversity and equal opportunities policies of their employers. This may be due
to the fact that the hegemony of the native speaker emerges not from the industry but
from the market-place. Native speaker teachers are used to promote courses and
differentiate between centres. Native speakers teach native English, and native English
sells better than local English. The mastery of the native speaker may not be a colonialist
conspiracy after all, but a consequence of the commodification of English Language
Teaching and the English language itself, and the globalization of education more
generally.
If, as Gray suggests, globally dominant languages such as English are
commodified and marketed as ‘economically useful’ (2010b), the brand of English itself
must be equally marketable as ‘economically useful’. This is Standard English or English
as a Native Language, the English of the native speaker teacher. This type of English and
the person who teaches it have become both marketing tools and marketable brands.
People buy them in order to position themselves in a competitive environment, whether
they are businesses hoping to expand into new markets or parents hoping to give their
children a competitive advantage over the neighbours’. There is no evidence that native
speakers are better English teachers than non-native speakers, but they are more
marketable because they can be promoted as selling a more ‘authentic’ product, a more
‘authentic’ brand of English.
The position of non-native English speaker teachers in private language centres
188
might prove a valuable area for future research, illuminating as it would another aspect
of teacher motivation and attitudes in an under-researched sector.
6.3.4 Summary
A member of the pilot sample, P27, noted “TEYL is extremely hard work if you’re not a
natural kids’ teacher.” It may, perhaps, be harder still for a teacher who does not want to
do it, feels poorly prepared or lacks the confidence to engage with children, but a ‘natural
kids’ teacher’ might not be the one who can choose the right games, songs and films. It
might not be the disciplinarian able to impose their will on the class. It might not even be
the one with the training. It might, in fact, be the one who is genuinely interested in
working with children, who enjoys engaging with young, and developing minds (Rixon,
2013). Perhaps teachers having fun and feeling motivated is the central issue because it
seems, from the evidence presented in this thesis, that one can meet some challenges of
teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners without training but none
without a positive attitude.
6.4 A framework for the training and occupational development of teachers of
English as a foreign language to Young Learners
In the pilot sample, P22 claimed that “everything is different (about teaching YLs), the
topics you discuss, the language you use, and the way you go about teaching.” This
research suggests that teaching English to Young Learners is different from teaching
adults, because of the specific and different characteristics of children’s learning and
development, and therefore Young Learner English language teaching, with its particular
challenges and opportunities, requires different skills and knowledge. Moon (2005, p.
32), for example, suggests three essential requirements for a Young Learner English:
knowledge and fluency in English;
knowledge of children’s foreign language learning and appropriate
teaching strategies;
knowledge of the different cognitive, affective and psychomotor stages
children journey through.
This study has found that, whilst most teachers of English to Young Learners have the
first, fewer appear to have the second or the third and discover aspects of both through
practical experience and observation. The research has also found that most teachers, with
appropriate support and encouragement, are willing to engage with Young Learners
despite a lack of formal training. Current training in teaching English to Young Learners,
189
as shown in Chapter Two (2.5 above), seems to consist of observed teaching practice,
some input on how to use course-books and some observations of other teachers. This
may not meet teachers’ needs as expressed in their responses to this research.
As shown in Table 10 above, members of the research sample indicated three main
areas where they felt training would be valuable, theories of child and development and
learning, classroom management and lesson planning and organization. The first,
‘theories of child development and learning’, includes identifying the needs of different
ages, how children learn languages, the differences between teaching adults and teaching
Young Learners and an overview of child development theory and child psychology.
‘Classroom management’ included behaviour, discipline and motivation, whilst ‘Lesson
planning and organization’ included shaping lessons and choosing materials and
activities.
In order to meet the first, a training course could cover key theories of child
learning, language learning and cognitive and affective development. Trainees might be
introduced to the ideas of Piaget, Vygotsky and Bruner as well as those of Krashen and
Aitchison on how children tune to different aspects of language at different ages. If “your
beliefs about how children learn languages… strongly influence how you teach them”
(Brewster, et al., 2002, p. 26), you may need to know something about how children do
learn languages before you try to teach them, whether it is through imitation,
comprehensible input, problem-solving, pattern-seeking or a combination of all of these.
You also need to know what children of different ages can and cannot do in terms of
cognitive processing and whether you should approach them as receptacles waiting to be
filled with knowledge, collaborators in a learning partnership, explorers of a new world
(Meighan & Meighan, 1990) or all of these simultaneously. This knowledge seems
essential to effective, meaningful, principled English Language Teaching to Young
Learners.
Input could take the form of a menu of possible activities and materials but the
menu might be supported by explanations of how the selected activities and material
support learning. Similarly, aspects of child psychology might be applied to behaviour
management tips. Training courses perhaps need to focus more on explaining why
teachers should pursue particular actions rather than just demonstrating how to carry them
out. This would provide the theoretical underpinning that may currently be missing from
many teachers’ personal practical knowledge and help skills become both adaptable and
transferrable (Hughes & Williams, 1998).
Whilst the questionnaire (item 22) asked respondents whether this should be
190
included as a module on an initial pre-training training course such as Cambridge’s
Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA) (74 per cent answered
‘yes’, as shown in Figure 18 above), this may be difficult without lengthening the course
from four to six weeks. However, perhaps R28 in the questionnaire sample is right, and
training in teaching English to Young Learners should come before that in training for
teaching adults, especially if it is more challenging, as some members of the research
sample suggested.
In the interview sample, T6’s reservations over logistics could be overcome,
certainly in centres outside the United Kingdom, by some Young Learner classes being
offered free of charge and in school holidays, like the classes this researcher taught in
Thailand for the Cambridge CELTA Young Learner extension. In the United Kingdom,
the number of summer schools for Young Learners or teenagers operating throughout the
country between June and August indicates a demand for English language tuition for
younger learners that enterprising organizations might exploit. They might, for instance,
arrange observed teaching practice on one afternoon a week for their trainees, or
encourage them to team-teach with a more experienced colleague. There are several
possibilities if a centre manager is willing to engage with them.
T6’s view that training must involve observed teaching practice rather than input
on a theoretical level might be misguided. What the respondents to this research seemed
to need was ideas, techniques and theories rather than classroom experience. They have
plenty of teaching practice once in-service. However, this approach to training, which
renders it restrictively technical (Block & Gray, 2015; Phillipson, 1992), could be a
dominant current paradigm in English Language Teaching where training appears to
focus on observed teaching practice meeting externally determined criteria rather than
raising awareness of theory and other frameworks to produce reflective, flexible teachers
(Block, Gray & Holborow, 2012). With the imminent demise of the Young Learner
extension accompanying an apparent move by the larger organizations to provide their
own in-house training for teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners, there
may be an opportunity to move training in a direction that is less teaching and more
teacher-centred.
A possible template or framework for a Young Learner training course, emerging
from this research and the suggestions of those working teacher who formed its sample,
might be as follows:
1. How children learn languages, including child development theories;
2. Motivation and behaviour management, including the multiple role of the Young
191
Learner English language teacher and working with special needs;
3. Planning age-appropriate learning including shaping lessons, selecting and
sequencing activities, evaluating materials;
4. Building relationships, including working with parents, working with owners
and managing careers;
5. Managing development, including setting up support groups, team-teaching and
maintaining a portfolio of personal artefacts.
This flexible five-item framework could form the basis of a five-day course, or a ten day
course (with two days spent on each item) or even a five-week course with one week on
each strand. There is considerably more involved in teaching English as a foreign
language to Young Learners than playing games and singing songs, and more than can be
covered in a 45 minute session of ‘fun activities for kids’ tacked on at the end of
something else.
With appropriate supporting material and activities, this course could be delivered
on-line by a mentor or supervisor from a university or other accredited training provider.
It might lead to a certificate. It could be tailored to individual teacher needs and developed
into a self-help package, either on-line or in print. It might also become a series of
workshops to be delivered face-to-face by trainers as an induction or an in-service training
course. It differs from current offers by providing more input on theory as opposed to
displays of teaching for observers, meaning it can be done in a centre without Young
Learners. Teachers in-post who wish to undertake teaching practice, which in this case
might mean experimenting with ideas and reflecting on those experiments, can organize
their own and implement their findings immediately, translating theory into practice in
their own classrooms, a key requirement of in-service training among members of this
sample. Teaching practice does not have to involve external, non-participant observation
to make it useful.
Whilst most teacher training courses provide much opportunity for teachers to
observe each other, few appear to provide opportunities for teachers to observe children,
something that might provide more insight into learner behaviour and motivation than
watching a teacher. Additionally, existing introductory courses such as the Teaching
Young Learners English Certificate (TYLEC) and International House Certificate in
Young Learners (IHCYL) focus on teaching practice and neglect input of theory. This
research shows that teachers feel the need for more theory, especially on how children
learn languages.
Finally, such a course might form the basis for training input for teachers
192
promoted into roles of additional responsibility. For example, for managers and mentors,
Strand 2 on learner motivation might be replaced with a module on teacher motivation
and, for materials writers, Strand 3 on lesson planning could be replaced with one on the
principles of materials development. The framework should be flexible to address
individual needs, as it should also encourage self-development of the kind seemingly
favoured by members of this research sample.
In addition to raising awareness of some of the key issues in teaching English to
Young Learners, a training framework might also suggest ways in which teachers can
organize the development of their own personal practical knowledge. In order to reduce
the hierarchical element of some occupational teacher development activities and blend
informal peer learning with institutionally organized events, team-teaching might
supplement or even replace non-participant observation, even though this is possibly the
cheapest and simplest form of teacher development to implement, whilst teacher support
groups discussing topics of mutual concern could supplement or replace in-service
training workshops (Brewster, et al., 2002; Head & Taylor, 1997; Richards & Farrell,
2005). Such support groups transfer responsibility for occupational development from the
manager to the teacher and might enable teachers to prioritize their own developmental
needs rather than pursuing those of the centre. Teacher support groups can also provide
teachers with a space for sharing and reflecting upon experience as an element in the
learning process, non-judgemental, non-hierarchical and self-directed.
Another possibility is to encourage trainees and early-career teachers to begin and
maintain a personalized development portfolio (Richards & Farrell, 2005) of artefacts
such as letters, reports, lesson plans, feedback forms and certificates to showcase their
development over the course of a career. The concept could be introduced to trainees as
part of the course and begin with the certificate, lesson plans and written feedback from
the course. It might then be transferred to the first post and form part of the probation or
first-year job plan especially if the initial trainer sets objectives and targets for the teacher
and agrees these with the employer. A three-month probation in an accredited language
school might even become part of the assessment requirements for Cambridge CELTA
or the Trinity College Certificate. Moving with the teacher from centre to centre, a
portfolio might also become a useful recruitment tool. It could even be used by the British
Council as part of its centre accreditation requirement. It would represent a move to a
more self-directed, self-initiated form of development, with individual teachers taking
more responsibility for their own growth and evolution. However, they may need to be
given some strategies for reflection or some guidance on how a career might progress,
193
and this guidance might be included in the training framework too.
The example framework outlined below demonstrates how the findings of this
research might be translated into practice. In a ‘real-life’ context, it would be developed
into a full and detailed syllabus, in consultation with those to whom it would be delivered.
Here, in this thesis, its purpose is to give the reader a sense of where the research could
lead and to show how theory and practice can be linked together in a constructive way.
The course can be delivered over five days, or a number of weeks, and can be
developed as an on-line programme, face-to-face workshop format or self-help materials.
Teachers do not need access to a YL class, but being able to try out the ideas in a
classroom situation would be helpful, particularly in the reflection stages. The main
purpose is to show teachers how their practice could link to established learning theories
and how the one can inform and enrich the other whilst, as part of the process, helping
teachers to develop into independent, reflective practitioners able to ground their
decisions in a recognizable knowledge-base.
Table 11 below shows the framework for Module One:
Module 1 Child Development and Language Learning
Aims To introduce participants to key theories of child development and
learning (Piaget, Vygotsky, Bruner and Krashen) and raise awareness of
how these theories might influence approaches to teaching, teaching
methodology and activity selection.
Core texts Children Minds (Donaldson, 1978),
Children Learning Second Languages (Pinter, 2011),
How Languages are Learned (Lightbown & Spada, 1999).
Tasks - In the light of the theories discussed, observe and reflect upon
children’s behaviour (‘live’ or recorded) in different situations
such as playing, reading or interacting with others.
- Make notes in a journal. If you are teaching YLs, monitor
behaviour within the groups in your class, and try to link this back
to some of the theories.
- Compare and contrast behaviour of different age-groups, related
to the theories advanced in the texts.
Outcomes Increased insights into the developmental stages of each age-group.
Table 11: Training framework, Module One: Child Development and Language Learning.
194
Table 12 below contains the suggested framework for the second module:
Module 2 Motivation and behaviour management
Aims To introduce participants to a range of practical techniques and strategies
for motivating YLs and managing behaviour. These techniques and
strategies should be derived from theories of learning and development
covered in Part 1.
Core texts Children Learning English (Moon, 2000),
Psychology for Language Teachers (Williams & Burden, 1997),
Teaching Languages to Young Learners (Cameron, 2001),
Values, Philosophies and Beliefs in TESOL (Crookes, 2009).
Tasks - Participants could carry out a survey of Young Learner classes to
ascertain attitudes, aspirations and motivation and link these to the
learning theories covered in Part One whilst also using them to
consider suitable activities for their classrooms.
- Conduct a case-study of an individual learner investigating their
needs and interests.
- Ask a focus group to develop a range of archetypal Young
Learners and use these archetypes to shape the development of
new products.
Outcomes Devise, share and evaluate (for general transferability) a range of practical
management techniques and strategies grounded in learning and
motivational theory as a database of principled practices.
Table 12: Training framework, Module Two: Motivation and Managing Behaviour.
195
The framework for Module Three is shown in Table 13 below:
Module 3 Lesson Planning and Organization
Aims To share with participants key principles of lesson planning, selecting and
sequencing activities and choosing and evaluating materials and to link
these principles with theories of child language learning and development
from Part 1 and motivation from Part 2.
Core texts The Primary English Teacher’s Guide (Brewster, Ellis & Girard, 2002),
Materials Development in Language Teaching (Tomlinson, 1998),
Syllabus Design (Nunan, 1988).
Tasks - Analysis and evaluation of a course-book package such as Happy
Street (Maidment & Roberts, Oxford University Press, 2009),
Chatterbox (Strange, Oxford University Press, 1989) or
Pacesetter (Strange & Hall, Oxford University Press, 2001) with
a view to discovering the underlying pedagogical principles of
such courses and how they reflect and relate to theories of child
language learning and development and motivation.
- Devise and implement a set of personalized, but theoretically
grounded criteria for the evaluation of materials.
- Write a set of extension or supplementary materials based on those
you are using, trial them with a class of Young Learners and ask
them to evaluate the experiment.
Outcomes Participants learn how to design and implement a set of criteria for
evaluating Young Learner materials and activities, and to experiment with
and reflect upon new, self-developed activities, stories or games.
Table 13: Training framework, Module Three: Lesson Planning and Organization.
Module Four of the training framework is presented in Table 14:
Module 4 Building Relationships and Developing Contexts
Aims To consider ways of engaging parents and building relationships with
employers, owners and other teachers.
Tasks - Survey parents for information on aspirations and expectations.
Simulate meetings and presentations.
- Design a ‘parent training’ workshop.
- Plan and organize an open day for the centre including
activities for potential YLs and briefing sessions for parents.
- Create a database of language centres, sharing and evaluating
policies and practices in order to support career development
choices.
Outcomes To raise awareness and increase confidence in dealing with parents and
employers and to help teachers situate their Young Learner classrooms
in the bigger context of the centre, the family and the community.
Table 14: Training framework, Module Four: Building Relationships and Developing Contexts.
196
Table 15 below presents the fifth and final module of the draft training framework:
Module 5 Managing Continuing Occupational Development
Aim To provide participants with knowledge, information and confidence
in managing their own development as teachers.
Core texts Professional Development for Language Teachers (Richards &
Farrell, 2005),
Readings in Teacher Development (Head & Taylor, 1997).
Tasks - Begin a teacher development portfolio and collect personal
artefacts such as certificates, worksheets you might have
devised, articles you might have read, work your students
might have done etc.
- Set up a teacher support group and hold a meeting.
- Devise a set of criteria for evaluating in-service training
workshops.
- Peer-teach a class with a colleague and evaluate its
effectiveness as a substitution for formal, non-participant
observation and feedback.
Outcomes Participants use portfolio to draw up a job plan (with tutor or peers)
with goals, objectives and time-line to structure development.
Table 15: Training framework, Module Five: Managing Continuing Occupational
Development.
These preliminary ideas, collected into a skeletal framework, could be developed
and expanded to meet specified customer needs in consultation with a partner
organization, or a particular group of teachers. It should remain flexible, able to be
adapted to meet the requirements of different contexts, different client-groups and
different stakeholders. They should, however, indicate at every stage how theory and
practice ought to be fused in a programme preparing teachers of English as a foreign
language to Young Learners in the way that a number of teachers in this research sample
seemed to want. Discussion with others in the field would result in more ideas, especially
for tasks, texts and outcomes, and thus the points outlined above serve as a non-
prescriptive foundation on which others are welcome to build.
6.5 Summary
The challenges of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners include
dealing with different developmental stages, managing classes and implementing centre
discipline policies. These skills can be developed from training, experience or teacher
development programmes if the teacher is sufficiently motivated and open to learning.
Pre-service training, particularly if it presents trainees with knowledge of influential child
197
learning and development theories, can provide a framework for teaching, guidance and
reassurance and the confidence that seemed lacking in some members of this research
sample.
This research found that most teachers do not get this basic pre-service training,
and that many lack the knowledge of key child learning and development theories that
might make their entry into the culture of English language teaching to Young Learners
easier, hence the proposed training framework outlined above.
‘Challenge’ is not necessarily a negative word nor does it necessarily have
negative connotations. Some teachers are excited by the possibilities of working with
Young Learners. They might still face the same difficulties but their attitude may
compensate for a lack of training or formal knowledge and this research indicates in 6.3
above how attitude can play a meaningful role in teaching and teacher development.
Nonetheless, they need training too. Awareness of child development and language
learning theory can surely only be helpful, particularly for beginning teachers, for those
who are enthusiastic about growing as teachers of English to Young Learners and for
those who wish to pursue a career in that area of the English Language Teaching industry.
Whilst skills and knowledge might be developed in the classroom through
experience, they will inevitably be bound by the context in which that knowledge is
acquired, including the school, the curriculum, the course-books and the overall mental,
intellectual, philosophical framework that informs a context. In addition, teachers need
the skills that will enable them to learn ‘on the job’ before they start the job if they are to
do so successfully. Consequently, this thesis proposes a change in the training of teachers
of English to Young Learners to place more emphasis on theory, more guidance on how
teachers might develop themselves and their personal practical knowledge over a longer
term career.
198
Chapter Seven
Conclusions, implications and future research
This chapter reflects on and reviews the research reported in this thesis. It is in six
sections. The first, 7.1, recaps the aims and purpose of the study, the research questions,
assumptions and hypotheses and the methodological approaches and methods adopted to
explore and examine those questions and assumptions. The second section, 7.2, presents
a summary of the key findings and relates them to the research questions before
considering, in 7.3, the contribution this research makes to the related literature and
current body of knowledge on this subject. 7.3 also discusses some implications for the
English Language Teaching industry and the sector concerned with teaching English as a
foreign language to Young Learners suggests some practical applications of the key
recommendations. 7.4 considers some limitations of the research and sampling methods,
justifies the research sample itself in the context of this study and suggests other methods
that might complement the questionnaire/interview survey that was adopted here. The
fifth section, 7.5, suggests some possible avenues for future research in this area before
the final section, 7.6, concludes the thesis by summarizing and reiterating the key findings
of the research.
7.1 Research review
7.1.1 Assumptions, aims and questions
This study of the training and development of teachers of English as a Foreign Language
to Young Learners (TEYL) aged between 5 and 16 years old in private language centres
outside the teacher’s home country originated in the researcher’s experience of teaching
English to Young Learners in such contexts, in his case outside the United Kingdom. As
explored in Chapters Two and Three of this thesis, the research was based on the
following assumptions:
a continuing, worldwide rise in the number of Young Learners learning
English leading to a continuing demand for teachers of English to such
young learners;
teaching Young Learners requires different skills from teaching adults;
a shortage of teachers with the requisite skills and knowledge leading to
the deployment of non-qualified teachers, in the private sector these being
trained primarily to teach adults;
199
few teachers of English as a foreign language to adults are retrained to
teach English to Young Learners too, being expected instead to be able to
adapt their training and experience and to teach across an age-range of 5
to 16 (as well as adults) with equal versatility.
The research aimed to explore those assumptions, to ascertain how far they were
true, how practising teachers in language centres perceive this situation and how they
develop the personal practical knowledge (PPK) they need. It had two key objectives:
a) to identify some challenges for teachers of English as a foreign language to
young learners and explore how far pre- and in-service training and development
programmes support teachers in meeting those challenges;
b) to develop the existing literature on teaching English as a foreign language to
Young Learners by contributing information about private sector practices in training and
development and on teachers’ attitudes towards teaching English to Young Learners,
including motivation and personal aspiration.
Three research questions were developed:
1. What challenges face teachers of English as a foreign language to Young
Learners in private language centres in international contexts?
2. What opportunities for training and occupational development are available to
those teachers?
3. How do these opportunities help teachers meet the challenges of teaching
English as a foreign language to Young Learners?
Through answering these questions, insights into this under-researched but influential
area of the industry might lead to some practical suggestions for meeting the challenges
posed to the industry by the growth in English Language Teaching to Young Learners.
7.1.2 Methodology and methods
The research was conceived as a phenomenological study of human experience in a
specific context. Data would be used both to interpret key aspects of the experience and
to construct new knowledge to further and deepen understanding of the phenomenon
itself. A mixed quantitative-qualitative approach was followed and drew on elements of
both methodologies to provide a detailed, rounded account. Consequently numerical,
quantifiable data in the form of derived descriptive statistics was combined with oral and
written evidence which was analyzed for content. A survey method was adopted,
involving a self-reporting questionnaires distributed electronically through the Internet
and a set of semi-structured face-to-face interviews.
200
The questionnaire yielded 139 responses from 39 countries (Table 5 above) and
investigated teachers’ training, development, classroom experiences and attitudes across
the respondent’s teaching career. In addition, 16 face-to-face semi-structured interviews
were conducted to explore some of the issues raised in more depth. In order to reduce
researcher influence, support objectivity and enable the generation of descriptive statistics
to support, authenticate and triangulate those yielded by the questionnaires, a schedule
was adopted in which all the interviewees were asked the same questions in the same
sequence and interviewer intervention was avoided in an attempt to avoid influencing
their responses. The research sample was constructed from pre-determined criteria,
namely that respondents had taught English as a foreign language to Young Learners in
a private language centre outside their home countries, or one where English is a first
language, and they were gathered largely through snowballing within networks and
centres. The sample comprised an experienced and knowledgeable group of practitioners
working within influential global organizations.
Data was grouped, categorized, transcribed and cleaned then coded for
presentation and display in numerical, graphical form using Microsoft Excel. It was then
authenticated by sharing with specialists in teaching English as a foreign language to
Young Learners who were not part of the research sample through conference
presentations and email communication of preliminary findings. In addition, summaries
of the findings were sent to participants in the pilot study for comment and checking.
Interview transcripts and summaries of key findings were sent to members of the
interview sample, both for checking and for confirmation that the data could still be used
in line with the ethical commitments shown in Appendix 1.
7.2 Research findings
The research found that around 85 per cent of these respondents had no training in
teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners prior to teaching them and that
less than half had gained a qualification in teaching English to Young Learners
subsequently. Approximately one-quarter had no qualification in teaching English as a
foreign language at all. In addition, it found that one-third of the sample had no support
during their first year in post, being left, it appears, to ‘learn on the job’. Further, it found
that approximately three-quarters of the sample had been materials writers, course
designers, teacher trainers and/or managers. Few of these had received any training in
how to perform these leadership roles, apparently reflecting an industry view that
practical classroom experience is of greater value than knowledge of a theory, what was
201
termed in Chapter Three as a ‘we don’t need the theory’ theory, although some centres in
the bigger networks provide funding for courses in teaching English to Young Learners,
the Cambridge Diploma or Masters’ degrees in various industry-related subjects like
Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL). The result is a patchwork
of practice that varies from centre to centre even within the same network.
7.2.1 The challenges of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners in
private language centre contexts
In answer to Research Question One, challenges reported in Chapter Five appear to be
different from those facing teachers of adults, perhaps because Young Learners are less
developed cognitively, emotionally and physically, and may consequently behave in less
predictable ways. The four challenges most frequently identified in the research were, in
descending order:
Behaviour management/maintaining discipline;
Motivating Young Learners and teenagers;
Working with different Young Learner age-groups;
Selecting and learning how to use appropriate resources and materials.
These challenges can be compounded by the commercial pressures experienced by many
private language centres where income from fees may lead to academic standards being
compromised in the interests of the business. Teachers in the sample felt that some
training in these areas would be useful, with nearly half suggesting knowledge of theories
of child development and language learning would be particularly useful since it might
inform their responses to all four of these challenges.
7.2.2 Training and occupational development opportunities in teaching English as
a foreign language to Young Learners
In answering Research Question Two, most of the participants had trained to teach
English as a foreign language but few had trained to teach English as a foreign language
to Young Learners. In terms of post-initial training teacher development activities, the
three most highly valued were, in order of descending frequency:
Talking with colleagues;
Trying something new in the classroom;
Going on a training course.
Just under half of the sample said that they had found formal training courses the most
valuable developmental experiences of their careers, citing the DELTA (Cambridge’s
202
Diploma in English Language Teaching to Adults) and higher postgraduate-level degree
courses such as an MA in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) or
Teaching English to Young Learners (TEYL). In addition to offering funding for such
courses, most centres offered a combination of observation and feedback and in-service
training (INSET) workshops, although a majority of teachers seemed to feel these were
less effective than other forms of teacher development.
Many of the teachers had taken on additional non-teaching roles and
responsibilities, the three most popular being, in order of descending frequency:
Materials writing;
Course development;
Teacher training.
Possible career pathways in teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners
seem to lead to academic management or teacher supervision, responsibility for materials
or course development or teacher training. Career patterns might be less of a linear
pathway and more of a cycle or intertwining helix, with teachers passing through the same
stages of development in each role, beginning as novice and ending as expert before
repeating that learning cycle in the next job.
7.2.3 Meeting the challenges of teaching English as a foreign language to Young
Learners
In answering Research Question Three, it seems that attitude and motivation are key
factors in meeting the challenges of teaching English as a foreign language to Young
Learners and of identifying and pursuing development and training opportunities. These
attitudes may change over time, with a number of respondents moving from neutral or
negative positions to positive ones due, perhaps, to greater experience and more focused
and appropriate in-service training and occupational development events. The research
also suggested that experience, training and attitude seem to combine with reflection to
generate knowledge which may be constructed through the interaction of a number of
elements including context. However, it also revealed that most teachers felt they would
have benefitted from some form of training in teaching English to Young Learners in the
early stages of their careers, since most of the teachers surveyed were untrained and
unqualified for teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners, with in-service
support dependent on the training priorities of the centre’s manager or owner.
203
7.3 Significance of the research
7.3.1 Contribution to the literature
This study complements recently published research into the global provision of English
Language Teaching to Young Learners by state-maintained schools and national
ministries through an exploration of the less visited world of the private language centre.
Such centres employ thousands of teachers and provide classes to thousands of learners.
Many of these teachers appear to be poorly qualified migrant native speakers whose
primary motive for working as teachers of English as a Foreign Language seems to be
travelling. Such centres, however, may be influential in their host countries through the
teaching methodologies, materials and assessment instruments they import, which may
be used to suggest a particular authenticity of product or brand that local schools might
not be able to claim. In addition, through marketing the brands of Standard English,
English as a Native Language and the Native English Speaking Teacher (NEST), the
industry can generate demand for these products which the commercial schools and
language centre chains can then meet. This area seems under-represented in the literature
on teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners.
In addition, much of that literature on teaching English to Young Learners seems
to concentrate on the primary sector, where a growth in demand may be occurring, rather
than the secondary, where most of this English teaching seems to be done. This study
examines both, since most private language centres offer classes for both, and expect the
same teacher to teach across the whole range, from 5 (and sometimes under) to 16. Age-
group specialisation may be difficult, even unwelcome, in the private sector. The
challenges, characteristics and demands of primary-age children differ significantly from
those of secondary-age children, and this research presents teachers’ views and
experiences of trying to adjust their expectations and approaches accordingly.
7.3.2 Implications for practice
Whilst adding to the research literature may be useful, influencing practice in the field
may be invaluable if it helps teachers of English as a foreign language to Young Learners
meet the challenges reported above by providing them with techniques and strategies
before they start. Despite the attraction of personalized, localized, contextualized training
and development programmes, the research revealed that some teachers may not have
access to the resources or support networks that facilitate such programmes. Since neither
teachers nor employers can be forced to do training in teaching English to Young
Learners, change may have to come through the training providers themselves. The
204
current generic, decontextualized, ‘one size fits all’ training can potentially limit teachers.
Nonetheless, it can also provide a basic set of core skills for teaching adults which can
serve as a starting point. Given that possibility, there is no reason why, with English
Language Teaching to Young Learners now so prominent, core skills for teaching
children could not also be covered by the Certificate in English Language Teaching to
Adults course, especially since Cambridge English is due to withdraw the Young Learner
extension to their CELTA programme in December 2016.
This research suggested half the teachers surveyed thought there should be input
on child development and language learning theory, with other recommendations
including classroom management and lesson planning, these being the top challenges
stated by the same sample. An outline for a basic, introductory training course in teaching
English to Young Learners was given in Chapter Six (6.4) above.
Since there is no guarantee that teachers will do any training beyond the
Cambridge CELTA or the Trinity Certificate, it seems vital to address the issue at the
beginning. This would also benefit those teachers who want to work with Young Learners
but who do not have the opportunity to do a certificate in teaching English as a foreign
language to Young Learners at International House or the British Council. However,
change depends on the commitment of the awarding bodies of Cambridge English and
Trinity College, and the British Council who accredit and validate many English
Language Teaching providers throughout the industry. An alternative is to continue with
private sector English Language Teaching to Young Learners staffed by poorly educated,
ill-informed teachers pursuing inappropriate methodologies they do not understand,
singing songs and playing games in English with young children who neither know nor
understand why they are there whilst their parents pay fees to support the profits of
publishers, school owners and other, associated businesses.
7.4 Limitations, authenticity and credibility of the research
Although the research sample appears, in its demographic profile, qualifications base and
members’ experience, to be broadly representative of the private language centre TEYL
sector, most of the respondents were based in satellite centres of large English Language
Teaching providers based in the United Kingdom. This is partly because the data was
gathered at a distance by email and the Internet, although the 16 interviews were
conducted face-to-face, and this meant the researcher had to use ‘gate-keepers’ to
distribute the questionnaires through the networks. Such organizations are more
accessible than smaller, locally managed ones because they are more visible and are
205
consequently easier to identify, locate and approach. However, gathering data via
snowballing and emailing, whilst introducing a random element to the sampling, also
makes the research itself dependent almost entirely on third-party assistance, personal
contacts via social media and from people encountered at conferences and meetings. This
research was almost wholly reliant on those people not only responding themselves but
also forwarding the questionnaire to their colleagues and contacts, and for them being
sufficiently motivated to complete it, which is why payment was finally offered as an
incentive.
Whilst the research sample may be mainly representative of teachers who work
for those organizations, it might not be fully representative of all Young Learner English
Language teachers in all private language centres across the world. However, because the
English Language Teaching industry is unregulated, the total number of private language
centres and therefore teachers in the world is impossible to know. A glance at a website
might tell a reader that there are 30 private language centres in Athens but it may not
indicate how many teachers work in each centre. Equally, some centres might not
advertise on the Internet. People who work for the British Council in France or Hong
Kong may not share the same experiences as people who work for Chester School of
English in Spain, Eurolink Academy in Kazakhstan or Disney in China. The only practical
option is to construct a sample that is representative in and of itself, providing insights
rather than generalizations from people who “have integrity in their own right” (Thomas,
2009, p. 101), in this research people who are doing the job and have no intrinsic, personal
stake in the outcome of the study.
The British Council, Trinity College, Cambridge English and International House
are influential bodies within the English Language Teaching industry through their
provision and ratification of training programmes such as the Teacher Knowledge Test
(TKT), and of the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) that can
influence admission to universities in the United Kingdom and beyond for international
students. This means the practices and policies within those industry-leading
organizations ought to be of greater interest, perhaps, than the practices and policies of
small, independent centres with only one branch in one town. Although the Chester
School, Disney or Eurolink might provide data of interest, none are likely to influence the
direction of English Language Teaching globally in the way the British Council or
Cambridge English might. In addition, it should be noted that most members of this
research sample worked in such centres in the early stages of their careers and therefore
many of the experiences they share may have occurred in similar contexts.
206
The questionnaire and interview survey approach might also be considered a
potential limitation by some readers because there is no guarantee that respondents are
being truthful or accurate in their recollections or that their views remain stable (Cohen,
Manion & Morrison, 2007; Foddy, 1993). Other ways of gathering data for this study
were reviewed in Chapter Four (4.3.1). These methods, not based on questioning people
and processing their answers but using discourse analysis or ethnographic observations,
might be considered more accurate or reliable than a questionnaire or an interview.
Longitudinal studies tracing development over the duration of a two-year contract, for
example, or case studies of individual teachers in-service along with teacher journals,
field notes and portfolios might yield valuable, reliable and authentic information on the
impact of training and teacher development activities on confidence, attitude, motivation
and knowledge.
Another possible approach might be to compare experiences across a variety of
language centres, for example three in the same country, either from the same network or
from different networks, or three in three separate countries, again from the same or
different networks. The researcher would travel to each centre interviewing, observing
and collecting questionnaires from teachers in the field, possibly keeping a log or a
journal. These might not be as representative, however, as this sample because the results,
although possibly generalizable, might also be too context-bound.
Questionnaire and interview were adopted essentially because these were the most
practical and cost-effective methods available to the researcher. The potential issue of
question-and-answer yielding unreliable, inaccurate or dishonest data was addressed
through piloting, internal data convergence and attempts to meet the requirements of what
Foddy (1993) calls TAP, or Topic clarity, Applicability of the question to the respondent
and Perspective, where each respondent gives the same kind of answer. Consistency of
response across the entire sample seemed to indicate the data’s accuracy.
This research was conducted using a diverse sample of practising teachers of
English as a foreign language to Young Learners drawn from nearly forty different
countries which suggests the data they provided might be authentic. Although most of
them come from two or three organizations, those are the most influential in the industry
and their policies and practices often determine what smaller, less visible centres do. In
addition, these organizations accredit such centres. Finally, whilst there may be some
limitations with the questionnaire/interview survey method of gathering data, the
responses of the sample members appear credible in that they echo, reflect and resonate
with each other internally within the sample and externally with other teachers of English
207
as a foreign language to Young Learners and the published body of literature on the
subjects of both English teaching to Young Learners and teacher development.
7.5 Suggestions for future research
This study has suggested several areas where future research might be of value in
extending not just this research but also developing the literature on the teaching of
English as a foreign language to Young Learners. Four areas of particular interest to this
researcher are outlined below:
1. As the research showed, many teachers become trainers, materials writers or
managers. It would be interesting to investigate the motivation and factors they consider
when they make such career choices so as to be able to develop appropriate training and
development pathways to support and guide them.
2. More research into what untrained teachers actually do in the Young Learner
classroom would also be of value. The strategies they employ, the activities they adapt,
the choices they make and the basis of those choices, researched through observation,
journals and focus groups, could reveal how these teachers face the daily challenges of
the Young Learner classroom in order to help managers and trainers develop strategies to
support teachers in meeting those challenges.
3. An investigation into the influence of context on motivation might also be of
interest. The size, nature, location, opportunities, structure and systems of a private
language centre affect teachers’ levels of commitment and engagement and be of interest
to recruiters and managers in managing culture shock.
4. The position of non-native speaker teachers in the global private language
centre sector might prove an interesting study. The motivation, aspirations, attitudes and
experiences of both globally mobile and, particularly, locally static individuals who
choose to work in the private sector may differ significantly from those of native speaker
teachers. Although this research did gather data from non-native English speakers, this
was not extensive nor was it the focus of the study. However, future research into the
experience and motivation of non-native English speaker teachers might complement and
extend this present study and enable the depiction of a more complete picture of the
English Language Teaching to Young Learner industry than is currently available.
In summary, teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners in the
private sector seems a significant and influential yet under-researched field. More
research might help the industry meet the challenges by constructing knowledge about
how learners learn and how teachers teach and using that knowledge to underpin practice.
208
7.6 Conclusion
Copland and Garton state that teaching English to Young Learners is “a cornerstone of
the ELT profession” (2014, p. 223) and yet “there remains a lack of classroom-based
studies and ‘young learners’ in general remains an under-researched area” (ibid., p. 226).
This thesis aims to contribute to the literature and, like other research in the field, “provide
insights into practice that teachers and other English Language Teaching professionals
will be able to draw upon in their own professional context [and] also contribute to the
informed discussion of the principles and practice of teaching English to YLs” (ibid., p.
229).
This research was about the preparation and support of teachers of English as a
foreign language to Young Learners aged up to 16 years old in private language schools.
It began with the assumption that the demand for English language tuition to Young
Learners was expanding globally at such a rate that the demand for teaching exceeded the
supply of teachers and that, as a result, both state and private schools were needing to
employ teachers who were not fully trained to work with children or even necessarily
wanted to.
A further assumption was that, particularly in the unregulated and often
commercially orientated private language centre sector, many Young Learner English
classes were taught by teachers qualified to teach adults but not Young Learners, and that
some of these untrained, unprepared teachers are being trained, supported and developed
by untrained, unprepared trainers and managers. It found from surveying a diverse range
of practising teachers of English as a foreign language to Young Learners that:
teaching Young Learners presents different challenges from teaching adults and
that those challenges include classroom and behaviour management, the selection
and use of appropriate resources and the need to teach across a wide range of ages;
basic training continues to focus almost exclusively on teaching adults and is
consequently no longer appropriate for the majority of teachers of English as a
foreign language;
a majority are not trained to teach Young Learners and many teachers are left to
find out how to meet these challenges by themselves;
formal teacher development seems to depend upon the centre’s commitment and
operational needs, meaning that development may be left to the teachers
themselves to organize;
209
a positive attitude can sometimes compensate for lack of training and many
teachers grow, develop and build careers in English Language Teaching to Young
Learners because they enjoy the challenges, feel they make a positive impact on
young people’s lives and find the rewards emotionally and intellectually
satisfying.
In 1991, Brewster called for teachers to be trained in teaching English as a foreign
language to Young Learners to meet an emerging need and demand. Two decades later,
in 2011, Franca claimed that teachers she worked with lacked both proper training and
appropriate skills and knowledge for teaching English to Young Learners. This research
showed that a majority of teachers believed such training would be useful and that this
should include some input on child language learning and development theory as well as
classroom-based teaching practice to provide a fuller, more rounded, more balanced set
of skills and knowledge. However, this research found that, far from expanding and
increasing, the provision of generic and general training for teaching English to Young
Learners may, in fact, be contracting.
One final issue lies in the fact that some teachers actually want to teach Young
Learners. These teachers, motivated and ready to engage with the challenges of teaching
English as a foreign language to Young Learners in foreign contexts and foreign cultures,
are almost as underprepared by their training as their adult-focused colleagues. They seem
to have to train to teach adults first, and then find a way to adapt that training, find and
pay for additional training or pursue de-contextualized academic programmes such as an
MA when they might prefer a course which blends input on theory with classroom-based
teaching practice. It may be that no-one is getting the right kind of training for teaching
English to Young Learners.
Nonetheless, most teachers appear to have risen as successfully to the challenges
of teaching English as a foreign language to Young Learners as they have to the
challenges of leaving their home country for a new one. They develop strategies and cope
with culture shock. They adapt their training to fit new contexts and adopt new roles and
responsibilities. They pursue academic qualifications, develop a range of skills and
fashion career pathways where few appear to exist. They learn how to deal with people
of different cultural backgrounds, with different languages, of different religious and
political persuasions, and how to live alongside these people, sometimes forming long-
lasting friendships and relationships. They become able to communicate with parents,
210
with children and with teenagers. These people are resilient, motivated, flexible and self-
reliant.
To summarize and in conclusion, teachers of English as a foreign language to
Young Learners in international contexts are skilled and rounded people. They are a key
resource and, in terms of the product marketing of English Language Teaching and the
teaching of English to Young Learners as commercial brands, key commodities.
Ultimately it is their resilience, attitude and willingness to engage with Young Learner
English teaching that leads to the success or the failure of the programme, the business,
the industry itself. Consequently, they need nurturing and sustaining by the industry if it
is to thrive. One way of doing this may be through appropriate, needs-focused training
that equips them with both knowledge and skills, and appropriate, personalized
opportunities for meaningful, stimulating occupational development.
211
Appendix 1
Sample copies of the informed consent forms
Dear Colleague,
Informed Consent for Your Data’s Use in a PhD Thesis
Thank you for participating in the attached survey. Its purpose is to explore some
experiences of teachers of English as a foreign language to young learners (aged 5 to 16)
with a particular interest in teacher training and development experiences and with a focus
on private language schools outside the UK. The information gathered, concerning
motivation, aspiration, ambitions and teachers’ choices, and collected through this
questionnaire, will be coded, with individuals and institutions rendered anonymous by
the allocation of numbers to names, and used in my PhD thesis as part of a narrative of
YL teachers’ professional experiences. The actual questionnaire responses will be stored
only on my lap-top computer and only I will have access to it. All identities will be altered
before any data is released. In addition, the questionnaires will be deleted from my lap-
top once the degree has been awarded.
If you are still interested in helping me with my research, please sign and date this
form below. Please note that some of your responses may be made public in conferences
or other publications. You will not be identifiable, but if you do not wish your responses
to be used in this way, please indicate by circling NO in Question 2 below.
Many thanks.
David Brining, PhD candidate,
Department of Education, University of York, York YO10 4DD, United Kingdom.
For further information, please contact me on [email protected].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. I consent to my responses to this questionnaire being used privately by Mr Brining for
his PhD thesis. YES/NO
2. I consent to my responses to this questionnaire being used publicly (though
anonymously) in conference papers and other publications. YES/NO
Signed …………………………………………………….Date………………………….
212
Dear _________,
Informed Consent for Your Data’s Use in a PhD Thesis
Thank you for participating in this interview. Its purpose is to explore some experiences
of teachers of English as a foreign language to young learners (aged 5 to 16) with a
particular interest in teacher training and development experiences and with a focus on
private language schools outside the UK.
The information gathered, concerning motivation, aspiration, ambitions and
teachers’ choices, and collected through this questionnaire, will be transcribed and coded,
with individuals and institutions rendered anonymous by the allocation of numbers to
names, and used in my PhD thesis as part of a narrative of YL teachers’ professional
experiences. The actual notes and recording will be stored only on my lap-top computer
and only I will have access to it. All identities will be altered before any data is released.
In addition, the recording will be deleted from my lap-top once the degree has been
awarded. A written summary of the interview will be made available to you for comment
before any data is published.
If you still wish to participate, please sign and date this form below. Please note
that some of your responses may be made public in conferences or other publications.
You will not be identifiable, but if you do not wish your responses to be used in this way,
please indicate by circling NO in Question 2 below. Many thanks.
David Brining, PhD candidate,
Department of Education, University of York, York YO10 4DD, United Kingdom.
For further information, please contact me on [email protected].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. I consent to my responses in this interview being used for a PhD thesis. YES/NO
2. I consent to my responses being used publicly (though anonymously) in conference
papers and other publications. YES/NO
Signed …………………………………………………… Date………………………….
213
Appendix 2
Sample copy of the pilot questionnaire
TEACHERS OF ENGLISH TO YOUNG LEARNERS - TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT SURVEY
The purpose of this questionnaire is to gather information for a doctoral thesis on teachers’
experiences of and attitudes towards teaching young learners, the training they receive and the
professional development programmes they pursue. The contribution of a practising YL teacher
like yourself will provide valuable insight into these areas of teachers’ professional lives. The data
will be stored on my personal computer and deleted when my project has been completed. All
respondents and institutions will be made anonymous through numerical code assignation and
a confidential key. The questionnaire is in five sections and consists of forty (40) questions on six
(6) pages. It asks why you became an English Language teacher and about your present teaching
context, your early experiences of working with young learners, your experiences of and attitudes
towards training and teacher development (TD) and about yourself. It should take around half
an hour to complete. When you have finished, please return as an email attachment to
For further information, please contact David Brining on [email protected] or at the
Department of Education, University of York, YORK YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please complete this section. I consent to my questionnaire responses being used for the purpose of academic research. I
understand that the data may be included in conference papers, presentations and articles.
Name ………………………………………………………………………. Date………………………………….
___________________________________________________________
I. BECOMING AN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER.
Please answer these six (6) questions with a sentence, date or short phrase.
1. When did you start teaching English as a Foreign Language?
2. What did you do before becoming an English Language Teacher?
3. Why did you become an English Language Teacher?
214
4. Did you do a pre-service training course (e.g. CELTA)? If so, which one?
5. What was your first job in ELT?
6. Why are you still working in ELT?
II. WORKING IN ELT.
These five (5) questions ask about your present school or language centre. They aim to
build a picture of your working context. All answers will be treated as confidential.
7. Please highlight, circle or underline how long you have been working for your current
employer:
Less than 1 year 1-2 years 2-5 years 5-10 years 10+ years
8. In which city and country are you presently located? __________________________
9. Is your school part of an international network? Yes No Don’t Know
+ If YES, which one? ____________________________________________________
10. In your current position, do you teach both adults and YLs? Yes No
+ Which do you prefer and why?
11. Please provide some information about your current centre/school:
a) Please highlight, circle or underline how many students are enrolled (approximately)
Less than 100 100-200 200-500 500-700 700-1000 1000+ Don’t know
+ And approximately how many are Young Learners?
Less than 50 50-150 150-300 300-450 450-500 500+ Don’t know
b) Please highlight, circle or underline how many teachers work in your centre:
Less than 5 5-10 10-20 20-30 30+ Not sure
c) Please highlight, circle or underline the YL age-range in your centre.
5-11, 11-16, 5-16, Other ________ Not sure
d) Please highlight, circle or underline the average YL class-size:
Less than 12 12-16 16-20 20+ Not sure
e) Please highlight, circle or underline the number of lessons YLs get each week:
1 2 3 3+ Not sure
215
+ Is this the same for all age groups? Yes No Not sure
+ If NO how do they differ? _______________________________________
f) Please highlight, circle or underline the length of these lessons (without breaks) for
teenage learners (i.e. over 13 years old):
60 mins 90 mins 120 mins 150 mins 180 mins 180 min +
+ And for younger learners?
60 mins 90 mins 120 mins 150 mins 180 mins 180 min +
Comment?______________________________________________________________
g) Please highlight, circle or underline the types of course materials you use:
UK-produced locally produced produced in-house
on-line a combination none
h) Who decides the syllabus and assessment system? (Please highlight, circle or
underline)
Centrally in-house Central office (UK) Host country government Class teachers
i) Is this aligned to the host country’s national curriculum? Yes No Not sure
j) Do all the teachers in the centre/school teach YLs? Yes No Not sure
+ If NO, how are teachers allocated to YL classes?
III. WORKING WITH YLS.
These ten (10) questions ask you to reflect on your early experiences of YL teaching.
12. When and where did you first teach YLs?
13. Did you consciously choose to teach YLs? Yes No
14. Had you done any YL-specific training prior to this job? Yes No
+ If YES, what did you do?
15. Please describe briefly what you did in your first YL lesson.
16. On a four-point scale, please highlight, circle or underline how enjoyable it was.
1. Very enjoyable 2. Quite enjoyable. 3. It was OK. 4. I hated it.
17. Please highlight, circle or underline the support you received in your first YL year:
a. reduced timetable b. observations & feedback c. team-teaching
216
d. a mentor e. regular planning meetings f. peer observation
g. INSET/training h. a development plan i. nothing at all
+ Which of these did you find most useful and why?
18. What advice (if any) were you given by your more experienced colleagues?
19. How did you feel about teaching YLs then?
20. How have your feelings towards teaching YLs changed during the last few years?
21. On a scale of 1 to 4, from 1 = Very prepared to 4 = Unprepared, please highlight,
circle or underline how prepared you felt before you started teaching YLs:
1 Well prepared 2 Adequately prepared 3 Not well prepared 4 Unprepared
Comment? _____________________________________________________________
IV. TRAINING AND DEVELOPING YL TEACHERS.
The next twelve (12) questions ask for reflections on your experiences of in-service
teacher training and development activities.
22. Please complete the sentence in less than five words:
“Teacher development is _______________________________________.”
23. What was your most memorable teacher development experience and why?
24. Please describe the teacher development programme provided by your current
centre.
25. Please rate the developmental value of the following activities, where
1 = very useful, 2 = quite useful, 3 = not very useful, 4 = not useful at all.
a. talking with colleagues about teaching issues 1 2 3 4
b. attending training courses 1 2 3 4
c. reading books and/or journal articles 1 2 3 4
d. attending conferences 1 2 3 4
e. trying out a new technique or activity 1 2 3 4
217
f. joining or contributing to an online forum 1 2 3 4
g. starting a new job/role (in same school) 1 2 3 4
h. moving to a new country 1 2 3 4
i. browsing the Internet for resources 1 2 3 4
j. attending staff meetings 1 2 3 4
26. What do you think makes a successful in-service training session?
27. What issues would you like to explore in INSETs in the coming year?
28. Do you have a job plan/personal development plan? Yes No Don’t know
+ If YES, how is it agreed and measured?
29. Did you have a probationary period? Yes No Don’t know
+ If YES what did you have to do to pass and what support were you given?
30. Please highlight, circle or underline any of these roles of enhanced responsibility you
have undertaken as an additional part of your teaching duties:
writing materials, developing courses, training teachers, mentoring,
supervising/managing teachers, managing assessment, running INSETs
31. Please highlight, circle or underline the support you received to help you manage this role.
Received training A mentor showed me Got a reduced timetable
Sent on a course Read up on it myself Shadowed the incumbent
None Other _____________________________________________
32. Do you feel you have adequate opportunities for self-development?
Yes No Not sure
Why/why not? __________________________________________________________
33. Do you feel you have a clear career pathway? Yes No Not sure
Why/why not? _________________________________________________________
V. ABOUT YOU.
The last seven (7) questions are to help establish a respondent profile.
34. Do you expect to remain in ELT for the next five years?
Yes No Don’t know
218
Why/why not? __________________________________________________________
35. What would you like to do next in ELT? ____________________________________
Why? ________________________________________________________________
36. Please indicate an age-band. 20-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, 60-69, 70+
37. Please indicate Male Female.
38. Do you consider yourself a native speaker of English? Yes No Not sure
39. Do you have a CELTA, Trinity Cert. or equivalent TEFL qualification? Yes No
40. Do you have a CELTYL, IHCYL or equivalent YL-qualification? Yes No
Please complete the following sentence in less than five words:
“Teaching YLs is _____________________________________________________.”
If you would like to the opportunity to contribute your views and experiences to further research in the area of Teaching English to Young Learners, please enter your email address in the box:
Please use this box for further comment:
Thank you very much for taking the time to complete this questionnaire.
219
Appendix 3
Electronic version of research questionnaire
*= required item
Section A: Working in English Language Teaching
1. How long have you been an English Language Teacher?*
Please choose one only.
Less than 5 years
5-10 years
10-15 years
More than 15 years
2. What did you do before you became an English Language teacher?*
Please choose one only.
Student
Teacher (of another subject)
Working (but not as a teacher)
Not working
3. Why did you become an English Language Teacher?*
Please choose one only.
To teach English
To travel/live abroad
Already living abroad and needed a job
Other:
4. Did you do a pre-service training course (e.g. CELTA, Trinity Cert.)?*
Please choose one only.
Yes
No
220
5. Where was your first job in ELT outside your home country?
Please write city and country in the box provided.
6. And your most recent (outside your home country)?*
Please write city and country in the box provided.
7. Is/was your school part of an international network such as IH or BC?
Please choose one only.
Yes
No
Don't know
8. Which age-groups have you taught?*
Tick all that are applicable.
Under 5
6-8
9-11
12-14
15-16
Other:
9. What is/was the average class size in your school?
Please choose one only.
Less than 12
12-16
16-20
20+
221
10. What kind of course materials do/did you use?
Please indicate as many as applicable.
UK-produced
Locally produced
Produced in-house
None
A combination of UK and in-house
Other:
11. Who decides/decided your syllabus/curriculum and assessment system?
Please choose one only.
The director of studies/senior teacher
Our head office
The local Ministry of Education
I do
Don't know
12. Is/was your syllabus aligned to the host country's curriculum?*
Please choose one only.
Yes
No
Don't know
Section B: Working with Young Learners
13. When and where did you first teach YLs?*
Please write city and country in box provided.
222
14. Had you done any YL-specific training BEFORE this job (e.g. CELTYL, TYLEC, IHCYL)?*
If yes, what did you do? Choose one only.
CELTYL
TYLEC
IHCYL
None. You had no training.
Other:
15. What kind of support did you get in your first year of TEYL?*
Please indicate as many as applicable.
Yes No Don't know
I had a mentor
I went to in-service training/induction
Someone observed me and gave me feedback
Someone helped me with planning
I had a reduced timetable
I did some team-teaching
I observed my DoS/ Senior Teacher
None. I had to fend for myself
16. How prepared did you feel to teach YLs?*
Please choose one only.
Well prepared
Adequately prepared
Not well prepared
Completely unprepared
223
17. How enjoyable did you find YL teaching then?*
Please choose one only.
Very enjoyable
Quite enjoyable
It was OK
Hated it
18. How did you feel about teaching YLs back then?*
Please choose one only.
Generally positive
Generally negative
Neutral/indifferent
19. Have your feelings towards TEYL changed since then? If so, how?*
Please choose one only.
More positive
More negative
Neutral/indifferent
20. To what factors do you attribute this change?*
As many as applicable.
More practical classroom-based training
More knowledge of YL learning theories
More 'on the job' experience
Other:
224
21. Which of these do you think are the most challenging for new YL teachers?*
Please rate the items on this list as VERY, QUITE or NOT VERY challenging.
Very challenging Quite challenging Not very challenging
Managing behaviour and discipline
Motivating YLs
Relating to parents
Relating to YLs
Finding appropriate materials
Choosing appropriate activities
Teaching a wide range of age groups
Just knowing where to start
22. Do you think a YL module should be added to the CELTA?*
Please choose one only.
Yes
No
Don't know
23. What do you think such a training module should include?
Please write in the box provided.
Section C: Teacher training and development
24. What was your most rewarding/stimulating teacher development experience?*
Please choose one.
Attending a conference
A moment/event/incident in a classroom
An INSET workshop
225
A training course (e.g. DELTA)
An academic course (e.g. MA/MSc)
None of these
25. Please describe the teacher development programme in your current centre.*
Please indicate as many as apply.
INSETs
Observations by senior staff
Peer observations organised with colleagues
Funding for training/further study
Opportunities for informal 'sharing' with colleagues
Time off for attending conferences
Research opportunities
None. We don't have one. I'm on my own.
26. Please rate the developmental value of the following activities.*
Very useful Quite useful Not very useful Not useful at all
talking with colleagues
training courses
reading books/journals
conferences
trying a new activity
online forum/ website
a new job
a new country
226
27. Which of these is most important to you in an in-service training session (INSET)?*
Please choose one only.
Practical and applicable content
Discussion of theories
An interesting range of participants
Based on teachers' needs
Other:
28. Do/did you have a job plan or personal development plan?*
Please choose one only.
Yes
No
Don't know
29. Did you have a probationary period?*
Please choose one only.
Yes
No
Don't know
30. Which additional roles and responsibilities have you undertaken?*
Please indicate all that are applicable.
writing materials
developing courses
training teachers
mentoring teachers
supervising/managing teachers
managing YL assessment
leading INSETs
227
31. What kind of support did you get for this?*
Please indicate all that apply.
got training
had a mentor
had a reduced timetable
read up on it yourself
nothing. You learned 'on the job.'
32. What would you like to do next in ELT?*
Choose one only.
Go freelance
Stay in present post/centre
Do/publish research
Write materials
Become a trainer
Get more qualifications
Go into management
Move to a new centre/country
Develop your teaching
Leave ELT for something different
Section D: About You
33. How old are you?*
Please choose one only.
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60+
228
34. Female or male?*
Please choose one only.
Female
Male
35. Do you consider yourself a native English speaker?*
Please choose one only.
Yes
No
Don't know
36. Which of the following qualifications do you have?*
Please check as many as applicable.
CELTA/Trinity Cert.
YL cert/CELTYL, IHCYL, TYLEC
DELTA/Trinity Dip
Master's degree (MA, MSc)
PGCE
Other:
37. Please complete the following sentence with a word from the drop-down list*
TEACHING YLS IS.....rew arding
Exhausting
Positively challenging
Negatively challenging
Fun
Exciting
Boring
A waste of time
229
38. I CONSENT TO THIS INFORMATION BEING USED IN A PhD THESIS.*
Please choose one only.
Yes
No
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
PLEASE ENTER YOUR EMAIL BELOW TO RECEIVE YOUR £5 AMAZON VOUCHER.
230
Appendix 4
Sample copy of interview schedule
PhD Research Interview on TEYL – Questions
PARTICIPANT NAME: ________________________________
INTERVIEW DATE: __________________________________
1. How did you get into ELT? Could you briefly describe your career pathway to date?
2. Can you describe the most challenging aspect of working in ELT?
3. Can you describe your first experiences of teaching YLs? Where were you? What was
the class like? What happened?
4. What do you think the main challenges were?
5. What kind of teacher-training had you done prior to teaching YLs?
6. How did you adapt this training to fit the needs of YLs?
7. Did you get any in-service training/support? Could you tell me about it please?
8. How motivated or committed did/do you feel towards TEYL?
9. Where would you like to go next in ELT? If you want to stay….
10. What’s the best thing about teaching YLs? And the worst?
231
Definition of key terms
There are a number of definitions of young learner (YL). For example, Cambridge ESOL
defines Young Learners as aged between 6 and 12 (Cambridge ESOL TKT-YL Handbook
2010, p. 2). For the purposes of this research, the definition includes children up to the
age of 16 because “numerically (the) greatest part of ES/FL... is at secondary level
(whether public or private)” (Crookes, 2009, p. 20) and consequently many teachers may
have to teach teenagers too. Thus a young learner (YL) is defined as aged between 5 and
16 years old and a very young learner (VYL) is under 5 years of age.
The ELT industry is defined as the whole business of English Language Teaching
including publishers, providers of examinations and assessment schemes, providers of
language teaching, owners and managers of schools and teaching centres, trainers and
providers of training courses, and academic applied linguistics and TESOL departments.
A native speaker teacher (NEST) is defined as one who has acquired English
unconsciously, generally in childhood, and uses it as their primary language of
communication whilst a non-native speaker teacher (NNEST) has consciously learned
English and may use a different language for primary communication. Both native and
non-native speaker teachers participated in this research.
A (private) language centre is an organization, including commercial enterprises
run-for-profit, cultural organizations and charities, which provide English language
tuition to students in exchange for a fee and whose operational and educational decisions
on curriculum content, teaching materials, teacher recruitment and selection, assessment
methods and student admissions are made independently of national ministries of
education. In the text such organizations are referred to as language centres and include
the British Council and International House.
Because primary and secondary education are defined differently in different
geographical areas, for ease of reference this thesis, written in a UK university, follows
the UK designation of primary as ages 5 to 11 and secondary as ages 12 to 16.
Pre-service training is defined as training “those who have little or no previous
classroom experience, either as mainstream or ELT teachers” (Hughes & Williams, 1998)
before they become teachers and in a Young Learner context refers to those with little or
no experience of teaching learners younger than 16 years of age. In this thesis, pre-service
training is a formally organized, formally accredited, qualification-based programme for
new entrants to English Language Teaching who have limited or no teaching experience.
Other terms are defined as they appear in the text.
232
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations, commonly recognized within the ELT industry, are used in
this thesis.
CELTA = Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults
DELTA = Diploma in English Language Teaching to Adults
EAP = English for Academic Purposes
EFL = English as a Foreign Language
ELT = English Language Teaching
IATEFL = International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language
IELTS = International English Language Testing System
NEST = Native English Speaker Teacher
NNEST = Non-native English Speaker Teacher
PGCE = Postgraduate Certificate in Education, a UK teaching qualification
SIG = Special Interest Group
TEFL = Teaching English as a Foreign Language, used here to refer specifically to
English language teaching outside the UK
TESOL = Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages
TEYL = Teaching English to Young Learners
VYL = Very Young Learner (learner of English aged under 5)
YL = Young Learner (learner of English aged under 16)
233
List of references
Aitchison, J. (1994). A real live talking machine. JET, 4(2), 6-7.
Bailey, K. (1990). The use of diary studies in teacher education programs. In J. Richards
& D. Nunan (Eds.), Second Language Teacher Foundation (pp. 215-226). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bailey, K. (1997). Reflective Teaching: Situating our stories. Asian Journal of English
Language Teaching, 7, 1-19. Retrieved from http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/ajelt/vol7/art1.htm
on April 5, 2013.
Beddall, O. (2013). Understanding teachers’ concerns about YL teaching in one British
Council teaching centre: a qualitative case study. Paper presented at the 47th annual
conference of the International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language
(IATEFL), Liverpool, UK, on April 9, 2013. PowerPoint and report emailed to researcher.
Beder, H., & Darkenwald, G. (1982). Differences between Teaching adults and pre-
adults: Some propositions and findings. Adult Education Quarterly, 32(3), 142-155.
Retrieved from http://aeq.sagepub.com on October 4, 2012. DOI:
10.1177/074171368203200303.
Block, D., & Cameron, D. (Eds.). (2002). Globalization and Language Teaching.
London: Routledge.
Block, D., Gray J., & Holborow, M. (2012). Neoliberalism and Applied Linguistics.
London: Routledge.
Block, D., & Gray, J. (2015). ‘Just go away and do it and you get marks’: the degradation
of language teaching in neoliberal times. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development, DOI: 10.1080/01434632.2015.1071826, retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmmm20 on December 2, 2015.
234
Bolam, R. (1990). Recent developments in England and Wales in B. Joyce, (Ed.),
Changing School Culture Through Staff Development, The 1990 ASCD Yearbook (pp.
147-167). Virginia, USA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development
(ASCD).
Bolitho, R. (1988). The emergence of a teacher development movement in ELT in the
UK. Unpublished paper cited in K. Head & P. Taylor, (1997), Readings in Teacher
Development. Oxford: Heinemann.
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher Cognition in Language Teaching: a review of research on what
language teachers think, know, believe and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81-109.
DOI: 10.1017/S0261444803001903.
Borg, S. (2012). Doing Good Quality Research. Paper presented at the seventh LanGUE
Research Conference, University of Essex, Colchester, UK, attended June 13, 2012.
Borg, S. (2013). Teacher Research in Language Teaching: A Critical Analysis.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bourne, J. (1996). English for Speakers of Other Languages in N. Mercer, J. Swann, &
B. Mayor (Eds.), Learning English (pp. 189-225). London: Routledge/Milton Keynes:
Open University.
Bowen, T., & Marks, J. (1994). Inside Teaching. Oxford: MacMillan.
Brandt, C. (2006a). Allowing for practice: a critical issue in TESOL teacher preparation.
ELT Journal, 60(4), 355-363.
Brandt, C. (2006b). Success on Your Certificate Course in English Language Teaching.
London: Sage Publications.
Brewster, J. (1991). What is good primary practice? In C. Brumfit, J. Moon, & R. Tongue
(Eds.), Teaching English to Children: From Practice to Principle (pp. 1-17). London:
Harper Collins.
235
Brewster, J., & Ellis, G., with Girard, D. (2002). The Primary English Teacher’s Guide.
Harlow: Penguin.
British Council Global English Product Catalogue, (2012). London: British Council.
British Council. (2012). Careers in English and Exams. Retrieved from
www.britishcouncil.org/teacherrecruitment-tefl-qualifications-young-learners/ October
3, 2012.
British Council. (2013). Our organisation. Retrieved from www.britishcouncil.org/about
on March 13, 2013.
British Council. (2014a). About. Retrieved from www.britishcouncil.org, May 12, 2014.
British Council/BBC. (2014b). Teaching English. Teacher Development. Retrieved from
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/continuing-professional-development, June 6, 2014.
Brown, H. D. (1986). Learning a second culture. In J. M. Valdes (Ed.), Culture Bound
(pp. 33-48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (4th ed.). New
York: Longman.
Brown, J. D. (2009). Open-Response Items in Questionnaires. In J. Heigham & R. Croker
(Eds.), Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics (pp. 200-219). Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Brown, J. D., & Rodgers, T. S. (2002). Doing Second Language Research. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Brumfit, C., Moon, J., & Tongue, R. (Eds.). (1991). Teaching English to Children: From
Practice to Principle. London: Harper Collins.
236
Bullock, D. (2012). Discovering Research: A teacher-friendly approach. Paper presented
at the 46th annual conference of the International Association of Teachers of English as a
Foreign Language (IATEFL), Glasgow, UK, March 21, 2012. PowerPoint slides emailed
to researcher.
C&TS (2014). IATEFL Young Learners and Teenagers Special Interest Group
Publication, Issue 1.
Cambridge English. (2012). YL extension to CELTA. Retrieved from.
http://www.cambridgeenglish.org/teaching-english/teaching-qualifications/celta/young-
learner-extension-to-celta/ on October 3, 2012.
Cambridge ESOL, (2011). CELTA Syllabus and Assessment Guidelines (3rd ed.).
Cambridge: Author.
Cambridge ESOL, (2011). CELTYL and YL Extension to CELTA Syllabus. Cambridge:
Author.
Cameron, D. (2002). Globalization and the teaching of communication skills. In D. Block
& D. Cameron (Eds.), Globalization and Language Teaching (pp. 67-82). London:
Routledge.
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Cameron, L. (2003). Challenge for ELT from the expansion of teaching children. ELT
Journal, 57(2), 105-112.
Carless, D. (2001). A Case Study of Curriculum Implementation in Hong Kong. In D.
Hall & A. Hewings (Eds.), Innovation in English Language Teaching (pp. 263-274).
London: Routledge.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education.
Abingdon: Routledge.
237
Coleman, J. (1994). Adolescence. In B. Moon & A. Shelton Mayes (Eds.), Teaching and
Learning in the Secondary School (pp. 57-62). London: Routledge.
Cook, V. (2010). Key Issues in Second Language Acquisition. Retrieved from
http://newcastle.academia.edu/VivianCook/Papers/615846 on June 28, 2012.
Copland, F., & Enever, J. (2014). Primary ELT does more harm than good. Debate at the
48th annual conference of the International Association of Teachers of English as a
Foreign Language (IATEFL), Harrogate, UK, April 3, 2014.
Copland, F., & Garton, S., with Davis, M. (Eds.). (2012). Crazy Animals And Other
Activities for Teaching English to Young Learners. London: British Council.
Copland, F., & Garton, S. (2014). Key themes and future directions in teaching English
to young learners: introduction to the Special Issue. ELT Journal, 68(3), 223-230.
doi:10.1093/elt/ccu030.
Copland, F., Garton, S., & Burns, A. (2014). Challenges in Teaching English to Young
Learners: Global Perspectives and Local Realities. TESOL Quarterly 48(4), 738-762.
DOI: 10.1002/tesq.148.
Cresswell-Turner, S. (2004). The slavery of teaching English. Retrieved from
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/3325192/The-slavery-of-teaching-
English.html on November 26, 2012.
Croker, R. (2009). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. In J. Heigham & R. Croker
(Eds.), Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics (pp. 3-24). Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Crookes, G. (2009). Values, Philosophies and Beliefs in TESOL. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Day, C. (1999). Developing Teachers: The Challenges of Lifelong Learning. London:
Falmer Press.
238
Day, C. (2004). A Passion for Teaching. London: Routledge.
Department of Business, Innovation and Skills, (2013). International Education- Global
Growth and Prosperity: An accompanying analytical narrative. London: HM
Government. Retrieved from www.gov.uk/bis on September 8 2015.
Disney. (2014). Careers in China. Retrieved from http://chinajobs.disneycareers.com on
December 2, 2014.
Donaldson, M. (1978). Children’s Minds. London: Fontana.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and Researching Motivation. Harlow, UK: Pearson.
Dörnyei, Z. (2002). Questionnaires in Second Language Research. Abingdon: Routledge.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Dreyfus, S., & Dreyfus, H. (1986). Mind over Machine. New York: Free Press.
ECC Thai. (2004). ECC YL Extension to CELTA Handbook. Bangkok, Thailand: Author.
Edwards, C. (1996). Learning to learn how to teach: developing expertise through
experience. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching
(pp. 99-107). Oxford: Heinemann.
Elliott, J. (1991). Action Research for Educational Change. Guildford: Open University
Press.
Ellis, G. (2013). Investigating why parents send their children to out-of-school English
classes. Paper presented at the 47th annual conference of the International Association of
Teachers of English as a Foreign Language (IATEFL), Liverpool, UK, attended April 9,
2013. Written summary emailed to researcher.
239
Ellis, G., & Knagg, J. (2012). Global Issues in Primary ELT. Paper presented at the 46th
annual conference of the International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign
Language (IATEFL), Glasgow, UK, attended March 20, 2012, PowerPoint slides emailed
to researcher.
Emery, H. (2012). A Global Study of Primary English Teachers’ Qualifications, Training
and Career Development. British Council ELT Research Papers, 12(08).
Enever, J., Moon J., & Raman, U. (Eds.). (2009) Young Learner English Language Policy
and Implementation: International Perspectives. Reading, UK: Garnet Education.
Enever, J., & Moon, J. (2009). New global contexts for teaching Primary ELT: Change
and Challenge. In J. Enever, J. Moon, & U. Raman (Eds.), Young Learner English
Language Policy and Implementation: International Perspectives (pp 5-20). Reading,
UK: Garnet Education.
Enever, J. (Ed.). (2011). Early Language Learning in Europe. London: British Council.
England, L. (1998). Promoting Effective Professional Development in English
Language Teaching (ELT). Retrieved on October 11, 2012 from
http://exchanges.state.gov/englishteaching/forum/archives/1998/docs/98-36-2-c.pdf.
English UK, (2014). Regional Breakdown of the Value of the ELT Industry in the UK in
2013. London: English UK. Retrieved from www.englishuk.com on September 8 2015.
Eraut, M. (1994). Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence. London: Falmer
Press.
ESL Base. (2013). English Language Schools Directory. Retrieved from
www.eslbase.com/schools on March 13, 2013.
Ferguson, G., & Donno, S. (2003). One-month teacher training courses: time for a
change? ELT Journal, 57(1), 26-33.
240
Fernandes, A. (2013). Training teachers in Brazilian Public Schools. Paper presented at
the 47th annual conference of the International Association of Teachers of English as a
Foreign Language (IATEFL), Liverpool, United Kingdom. Attended April 9th 2013.
Notes made during presentation. Summary of paper published in IATEFL 2013: Liverpool
Conference Selections, ed. T. Pattison, pp. 36-38. Faversham, UK: IATEFL.
Fessler, R. (1995). Dynamics of Career Stages. In T. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.),
Professional Development in Education: New Paradigms and Practices. New York:
Teachers’ College Press.
Fessler, R., & Christensen, J. (1992). The Teacher Career Cycle: Understanding and
Guiding the Professional Development of Teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Foddy, W. (1993). Constructing Questions for Interviews and Questionnaires: Theory
and Practice in Social Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Franca, V. B. (2011). Training young learner teachers: facing the challenge. Paper
presented at the 45th annual conference of the International Association of Teachers of
English as a Foreign Language (IATEFL), Brighton, UK. Retrieved March 13, 2013,
from IATEFL 2011: Brighton Conference Selections CD-ROM.
Francis, N. (2014). Taking storybook lessons further through art, drama, sport and yoga.
Paper presented at the 48th annual conference of the International Association of Teachers
of English as a Foreign Language (IATEFL), Harrogate, UK, on April 2, 2014.
Freeman, D. (2002). The hidden side of the work: teacher knowledge and learning to
teach. Language Teaching, 35(1), 1-13. DOI: 10.1017/S0261444801001720.
Fröhlich-Ward, L. (1991). Two lessons: five year olds and seven year olds. In C. Brumfit,
J. Moon, & R. Tongue (Eds.), Teaching English to Children: From Practice to Principle
(pp. 97-108). London: Harper Collins.
Garton, S. (2014). Unresolved issues and new challenges in teaching English to young
learners: the case of South Korea. Current Issues in Language Planning, 15(2), 201-219.
DOI: 10.1080/14664208.2014.858657.
241
Garton, S., Copland, F., & Burns A. (2011). Investigating global practices in Teaching
English to Young Learners. British Council ELT Research Papers 11(01).
Gibbons, J. (1989). Issues of language in lower forms of Hong Kong Secondary Schools.
In C. Kennedy (Ed.), Language Planning and English Language Teaching (pp. 124-133).
Hemel Hempstead, UK: Prentice Hall.
Gitlin A., & Labaree, D. F. (1996). Historical Notes on the Barriers to the
Professionalization of American Teachers: The Influence of Markets and Patriarchy. In
I. Goodson & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teachers’ Professional Lives (pp. 88-108). London:
Falmer Press.
Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Chicago: Aldane.
Golombek, P. R. (1998). A study of language teachers’ personal practical knowledge.
TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 447-464. DOI: 10.2307/3588117.
Goodson, I., & Hargreaves, A. (Eds.). (1996). Teachers’ Professional Lives. London:
Falmer Press.
Gorham, J. (1985). Differences between Teaching Adults and Pre-Adults: A Closer Look.
Adult Education Quarterly, 35(4), 194-209. Retrieved from http://aeq.sagepub.com on
October 4, 2012. DOI: 10.1177/0001848185035004002.
Graddol, D. (1997). The Future of English? London: British Council. In J. Jenkins (2009),
World Englishes (2nd edition), (pp. 225-231). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Graves, K. (1996). A framework of course development processes. In K. Graves (Ed.),
Teachers as Course Developers (pp. 12-38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Graves, K. (Ed.). (1996). Teachers as Course Developers. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Gray, J. (2010a). The Construction of English. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
242
Gray, J. (2010b). The Branding of English and the Culture of the New Capitalism:
Representations of the World of Work in English Language Textbooks. Applied
Linguistics, 31(5), 714–733. DOI:10.1093/applin/amq034. Retrieved from
http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ on October 4, 2012.
Hall, D., & Hewings, A. (2001). Innovation in English Language Teaching. London:
Routledge.
Hall, G. (2011). Exploring English Language Teaching. London: Routledge.
Hargreaves, A. (1984). Experience Counts, Theory Doesn't: How Teachers Talk About
Their Work. Sociology of Education, 57(4), Ethnographic Studies of Education, pp. 244-
254. American Sociological Association. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2112428 on November 22, 2012.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing Teachers, Changing Times – Teachers’ Work and
Culture in the Post-Modern Age. London: Cassell.
Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (1996). Teachers’ Professional Lives: Aspirations and
Actualities. In I. Goodson & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teachers’ Professional Lives (pp. 1-
27). London: Falmer Press.
Head, K., & Taylor, P. (1997). Readings in Teacher Development. Oxford: Heinemann.
Heigham, J., & Croker, R., (Eds.). (2009). Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hettiarachchi, S. (2010). ESL Teacher Motivation in Sri Lankan Public Schools. Masters
Theses and Doctoral Dissertations, Paper 316, Eastern Michigan University, USA.
Retrieved from http://commons.emich.edu/theses/316 on December 12, 2012.
Hobbs, V. (2013). ‘A basic starter pack’: the TESOL Certificate as a course in survival.
ELT Journal, 67(2), pp. 163-174. DOI: 10.1093/elt/ccs078.
Holborow, M. (1999). The Politics of English. London: SAGE.
243
Holliday, A. (2001). Achieving cultural continuity in curriculum innovation. In D. Hall
& A. Hewings (Eds.), Innovation in English Language Teaching (pp. 169-177). London:
Routledge.
Holliday, A. (2005). The Struggle to Teach English as an International Language.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Holly, M. (1989). Reflective Writing and the Spirit of Inquiry. Cambridge Journal of
Education, 19(1), 71-79. DOI: 10.1080/0305764890190109.
Hoon, C. (2008). Beyond Linguistic Imperialism: The Place of Singlish in Singapore. In
P. Tan & R. Rudby (Eds.), Language as Commodity: Global Structures, Local
Marketplaces (pp. 57-69). London: Continuum.
Hopkins, D. (2002). A Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Research. (3rd Ed.). Maidenhead:
Open University Press and McGraw-Hill.
Howatt, A. (2004). A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Huberman, M. (1993). The Lives of Teachers. London: Cassell.
Huberman, M., & Grounauer, M. (1993). Teachers’ Motivations and Job Satisfactions. In
M. Huberman, (Ed.), The Lives of Teachers (pp. 109-137). London: Cassell.
Hughes, A. (2001). The Teaching of Language to Young Learners: Linking
Understanding and Principle with Practice. In M. J. Raya, P. Faber, W. Gewehr, & A.
Peck (Eds.), Effective Foreign Language Teaching at the Primary Level (pp. 17-24).
Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Hughes, A., & Williams, M. (1998). Teacher Training. York: EFL Unit, University of
York, UK.
IATEFL. (2014). Welcome to IATEFL. Retrieved from www.iatefl.org, March 18, 2014.
244
Impey, G., & Underhill, N. (1994). The ELT Manager’s Handbook. Oxford: MacMillan.
International House. (2013). IH Certificate in Teaching Young Learners and Teenagers.
Retrieved from http://ihworld.com/online-
training/course/ih_certificate_in_teaching_young_learners_teenagers_online on March
13, 2013.
Ivankova, N., & Creswell, J. (2009). Mixed Methods. In J. Heigham & R. Croker (Eds.),
Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics (pp. 135-161). Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Jenkins, J. (2009). World Englishes. (2nd edition). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Johnston, B. (1997). Do EFL teachers have careers? TESOL Quarterly, 31(4), 679-712.
DOI: 10.2307/3587756.
Johnstone, R. (2009). An early start: what are the generalized conditions for success? In
J. Enever, J. Moon, & U. Raman (Eds.), Young Learner English Language Policy and
Implementation: International Perspectives (pp. 31-41). Reading: Garnet Education.
Kennedy, C. (Ed.). (1989). Language Planning and English Language Teaching. Hemel
Hempstead: Prentice Hall.
Kerr, P. (1996). Grammar for trainee teachers. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge
and Change in Language Teaching (pp. 93-98). Oxford: Heinemann.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and
Development. New Jersey, USA: Prentice Hall.
Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. London: Longman.
Kremer-Hayon, L., & Fessler, R. (1991). The inner world of school principals:
Reflections on career life stages. Paper presented at Fourth International Conference of
the International Study Association on Teacher Thinking, 23-27 September 1991,
University of Surrey, UK.
245
Lamb, M. (1995). The Consequences of INSET. ELT Journal, 49(1), 72-80.
Language Link Russia. (2012). Teach English in Russia. Retrieved from
http://jobs.languagelink.ru/jobs/efl/faq on October 3, 2012.
Leburn, H. (1991) Materials writing: setting the wheels in motion. In C. Kennedy and J.
Jarvis (Eds.), Ideas and Issues in Primary ELT (pp 98-115). Edinburgh and Walton-on-
Thames: Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd.
Leithwood, K. (1990). The principal’s role in teacher development. In B. Joyce (Ed.),
Changing School Culture through Staff Development. Virginia, USA: Association of
Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Lewis, G. (2007). Teenagers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (1999). How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Lindstromberg, S. (2004). Language Activities for Teenagers. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Machura, L. (1991). Using literature in language teaching. In C. Brumfit, J. Moon, & R.
Tongue (Eds.), Teaching English to Children: From Practice to Principle (pp. 67-80).
London: Harper Collins.
Maley, A. (1986). The teaching of English in China. In J. M. Valdes (Ed.), Culture Bound
(pp 102-111). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maley, A. (1992). An open letter to the profession. ELT Journal, 46(1), 96-99.
Mann, S. (2005). The Language Teacher’s Development. Language Teaching, 38(3),
103-118. DOI: 10.1017/S0261444805002867.
246
McDrury, J., & Alterio, M. (2003). Learning through story-telling in higher education:
Using reflection and experience to improve learning. London: Kogan Page.
McKay, S. (1992). Teaching English Overseas: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Meddings, L. (2004). Running after the gravy-train. Retrieved from
www.guardian.co.uk/education/2004/jan/29/tefl/print/ on November 26, 2012.
Medgyes, P. (1982). The schizophrenic teacher. ELT Journal, 37(1), 1, 2-6.
Meighan, R., & Meighan, J. (1990). Alternative roles for learners with particular
reference to learners as democratic explorers in teacher education courses. The School
Field, 1(1), 61-77.
Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New
Methods. Beverley Hills, CA, USA: Sage.
Modiano, M. (2001). Linguistic imperialism, cultural integrity, and EIL. ELT Journal,
55(4), 339-346.
Moon, J. (2000). Children Learning English. Oxford: MacMillan.
Moon, J. (2005). Teaching English to Young Learners: the challenges and the benefits.
In English 30, Winter 2005. London: British Council. Retrieved from
http://ventata.fl.unc.edu.ar/files/Material-British-Council.pdf on May 9, 2014.
Moon, J. A. (1999). Reflection in Learning and Professional Development. Abingdon,
UK: Routledge Falmer.
Muñoz, C. (2006). Age and the Rate of Foreign Language Learning. Clevedon, UK:
Multilingual Matters.
247
Muñoz, C., & Singleton, D. (2011). A critical review of age-related research on L2
ultimate attainment. Language Teaching, 44(1), 1-35.
DOI: 10.1017/S0261444810000327.
NILE. (2014). Homepage. Retrieved from www.nile-elt.com on June 12, 2014.
Numrich, C. (1996). On becoming a language teacher: Insights from Diary Studies.
TESOL Quarterly, 30(1), 131-153. DOI: 10.2307/3587610.
Nunan, D. (1992). Research Methods in Language Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and
practices in the Asia-Pacific region. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 589−613.
DOI: 10.2307/3588214.
Oxford TEFL. (2013). Teaching Young Learners courses. Retrieved from
http://www.oxfordtefl.com/teacher-development-courses/teaching-young-learners on
January 18, 2013.
Pennington, M. C. (1995). Work satisfaction, motivation and commitment in teaching
English as a Second Language. ERIC Document ED404850, retrieved March 13, 2013.
Pennycook, A. (1994). The Cultural Politics of English as an International Language.
Harlow: Pearson.
Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Piaget, J. (1926/2002). The Language and Thought of the Child. Abingdon: Routledge.
Pinter, A-M. (2011). Children Learning Second Languages. Basingstoke: Palgrave
MacMillan.
Pinter, A-M. (2006). Teaching Young Language Learners. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
248
Praver, M., & Oga-Baldwin, W. (2008). What Motivates Language Teachers:
Investigating Work Satisfaction and Second Language Pedagogy. Polyglossia, 14, 1-8.
Retrieved from http://r-
cube.ritsumei.ac.jp/bitstream/10367/222/1/Polyglossia14_What%20Motivates%20Lang
uage%20Teachers.pdf on April 5, 2013.
Puchta, H., & Schratz, M. (1993). Teaching Teenagers. Harlow: Longman.
Rapley, T. (2001). The art(fulness) of open-ended interviewing: some considerations on
analysing interviews. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 303-323. London: SAGE.
Read, C. (2014). Little sponges? Child development and foreign language learning in pre-
school. Presentation given at IATEFL/CyTEA Language Learning 2-6: International
perspective on early years’ plurilingualism conference, European University, Cyprus,
May 23, 2014.
Richards, J. (1998). Beyond Training. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., & Farrell, T. (2005). Professional Development for Language Teachers.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., & Lockhart, C. (1996). Reflective Teaching in Second Language
Classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J., & Pennington, M. (1998). The first year of teaching. In J. Richards (Ed.),
Beyond Training (pp 173-190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Richards, K. (2009). Interviews. In J. Heigham & R. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative Research
in Applied Linguistics (pp. 182-199). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ridley, D. (2012). The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students. London:
SAGE Publications.
249
Rixon, S. (1992). English and Other Languages for younger children: practice and theory
in a rapidly changing world. Language Teaching, 25(2), 73-93. DOI:
10.1017/S026144480000673X.
Rixon, S. (2000). Worldwide Survey of Primary ELT. London: British Council.
Rixon, S. (2013). British Council Survey of Policy and Practice in Primary English
Language Teaching Worldwide. London: British Council.
Rogers, J. (1982). The world for sick proper. ELT Journal, 36(3), 144-151.
Roulston, K. (2010). Reflective Interviewing: A Guide to Theory and Practice. London:
SAGE.
Rudby, R. (2008). English in India: The Privilege and Privileging of Social Class. In P.
Tan & R. Rudby (Eds.), Language as Commodity: Global Structures, Local Marketplaces
(pp. 122-145). London: Continuum.
Scovel, T. (1999). The younger the better: myth and bilingual education. In R. D.
Gonzalez & I. Melis (Eds.), Language Ideologies: Critical Perspectives on the English
Only Movement (pp. 114-136). Urbana, IL., USA: National Council of Teachers of
English.
Seliger, H., & Shohamy, E. (1989) Second Language Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Senior, R. (2006). The Experience of Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Singh, M., & Han, J. (2008). The Commoditization of English and the Bologna Process.
In P. Tan & R. Rudby (Eds.), Language as Commodity: Global Structures, Local
Marketplaces (pp 204-224). London: Continuum.
250
Sketchley, M. (2013). A Teacher’s Toolkit for Primary & Teenage Young Learners.
C&TS, autumn 2013. Faversham, UK: IATEFL Young Learner and Teenager Special
Interest Group.
Slaven, A., & Slaven, G. (1991). Ali, are you a boy or a monster? In C. Brumfit, J. Moon,
& R. Tongue (Eds.), Teaching English to Children: From Practice to Principle (pp. 49-
66). London: Harper Collins.
Talking Shop, (1989). Teacher Development: an Employer’s View. ELT Journal, 43(2),
127-132.
Tan, P., & Rudby, R. (Eds.). (2008). Language as Commodity: Global Structures, Local
Marketplaces. London: Continuum.
Teaching Knowledge Test (TKT) Handbook, (2012). Cambridge: Cambridge ESOL.
Retrieved October 23, 2012, from http://www.teachers.CambridgeESOL.org/ts/teaching
qualifications/tkt/.
Teaching Knowledge Test (TKT) Young Learners (YLs) Handbook for Teachers, (2010).
Cambridge: Cambridge ESOL. Retrieved October 23, 2012, from
http://www.teachers.CambridgeESOL.org/ts/teaching qualifications/tktyl/.
tefl.com. (2014). Job seekers. Retrieved from www.tefl.com on November 9, 2012 and
December 2, 2014.
Thomas, G. (2009). How to do your Research Project. London: SAGE Publications.
Thornbury, S. (2001). The Unbearable Lightness of EFL. ELT Journal, 55(4), 391-396.
Timmis, I. (2002). Native-speaker norms and International English: a classroom view.
ELT Journal, 56(2), 2, 240-249.
Tomlinson, B. (1988). In-Service TEFL – Is it worth the risk? The Teacher Trainer.
Retrieved April 5, 2013, from https://www.tttjournal.co.uk/uploads/File/back_articles/In-
Service_TEFL.pdf.
251
Tough, J. (1991). Young Children Learning Languages. In C. Brumfit, J. Moon, & R.
Tongue (Eds.), Teaching English to Children: From Practice to Principle (pp. 97-108).
London: Harper Collins.
Trinity College. (2012). ESOL Qualifications. Retrieved from www.trinitycollege.co.uk
on October 3, 2012.
Tsui, A. (2003). Understanding Expertise in Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Underhill, A. (1994). Introduction. In G. Impey & N. Underhill. The ELT Manager’s
Handbook. Oxford: MacMillan.
Underhill, A. (1997). Introduction. In K. Head & P. Taylor. Readings in Teacher
Development. Oxford: Heinemann.
Ur, P. (1992). Teacher Learning. ELT Journal, 46(1), 56-61.
Ur, P. (1998). Teacher Training, Teacher Development. English Teaching Professional,
8(21), 1.
Valette, R. (1986). The culture test. In J. M. Valdes (Ed.), Culture Bound (pp. 179-197).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Valdes, J. M. (Ed.). (1986). Culture Bound. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Lier, L. (1988). The Classroom and the Language Learner. London: Longman.
Vassiliou, N. (2014). A personal account of one teacher’s journey through a challenging
and rewarding experience of teaching very young learners. Presentation given at
IATEFL/CyTEA Language Learning 2-6: International perspectives on early years’
plurilingualism conference, European University, Cyprus, May 25, 2014.
252
Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of Beginning Teachers. Review of Educational
Research, 54(2), 143-178. Retrieved from http://rer.sagepub.com/content/54/2/143. DOI:
10.3102/00346543054002143.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Harvard, USA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, USA: The Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT) Press.
Wallace, M. (1991). Training Foreign Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Wallace, M. (1998). Action Research for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Wideen M., Mayer-Smith J., & Moon B., (1996). Knowledge, Teacher Development and
Change. In I. Goodson & A. Hargreaves (Eds.), Teachers’ Professional Lives (pp. 187-
203). London: Falmer Press.
Wiffin, S., & Gibbons, H., (2013). Problems in the Primary Classroom: Prevention and
Cure. Retrieved from www.pearsonelt.com., April 2013).
Williams, M., & Burden, R. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Willis, J., & Willis, D. (Eds.). (1996). Challenge and Change in Language Teaching.
Oxford: Heinemann.
Woodward, T. (1996). Professional communities and shared paradigms. In J. Willis & D.
Willis (Eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (pp. 4-9). Oxford:
Heinemann.
XE. (2014). Currency converter. Retrieved from www.xe.com on June 13, 2014.
